We are searching data for your request:
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.
"It is possible to finance drinking water supplies in most countries around the world by 2030," says Michael Jacob of the Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change.
In India alone, a carbon tax could generate around $ 115 billion a year and only part of that revenue would be needed to make water drinkable, which means that there would be enough money for sanitation and electricity, "says the In fact, the infrastructure needed for the world's second-largest country would consume only about 4 percent of tax revenue.
However, some countries, especially in sub-Saharan Africa, where the price of carbon would not be enough because carbon emissions are so low that they would produce little income. "However, this financing gap could be solved by considering developing countries that have not yet exhausted their right to use the atmosphere - says Jakob -. Avoiding these emissions would entitle them to compensation payments from industrialized countries."
The MCC study, which examined the development potential, not only for water, sanitation and electricity, but also for ICT and roads, has been released under the title 'Revenues from carbon pricing could close infrastructure gaps "in the journal 'World Development.' In their calculations, the researchers assume that every country in the world is now introducing a steadily increasing carbon tax.
In 2020 the tax would have to be 40 dollars per ton of CO2 emissions and increase to 175 dollars in 2030. "In addition to generating income for infrastructure, the tax would thus contribute to the international objective of limiting global warming to two degrees" explains Sabine Fuss, a co-author of the study and a visiting scholar at the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA).
"This is because the tax penalizes the use of fossil fuels and creates incentives for zero-carbon technologies," he adds. The money not needed for infrastructure could be used to mitigate the effects of climate change, such as rising sea levels, which particularly affects developing countries.
As is well known, the increase in the price of coal, oil and gas, as part of climate protection measures brings problems because no one wants to pay more. Tying income to a specific use increases acceptance among the population and decreases the risk of misappropriation, and the price of carbon could be used to reduce the burdens faced, in particular, by the poorest segments of the population. the population, such as the value added tax.
"One thing is clear: for climate protection to be effective, it must be integrated into a broader sustainable development scheme, and vice versa," says Jakob. "Simply infusing more money is not going to solve the problem. Instead, decisive factors such as a functioning state, democratic decision-making and relevant institutions are taken into account," he adds.