SHOCK: China to introduce a carbon tax

Except that it will be just over $1.50 a tonne… from 2015… possibly… compared to Australia’s $23 a tonne (fifteen times as much)… from 2012… definitely.

Still madness.



  1. … and as a Communist country, the government will be taxing itself.

  2. Mandy Love via Facebook says:

    Maurice Strong, is that you? lol

  3. This year I am trying to see the total flip of the madness, the good news is that like all taxes they get handed to the consumer. This will mean that china will not be the strong manufacturing capital as it is. The tax will show if china realy is communist or that it was just as all communist countries where, as just a form of imperialism hidden in communist marketing. because if it was communist it truly will apply the tax to the environment, not like north america where it was yet just a method for corporations to decide how to store carbon. where as it should be a environmental tax spent on cleaning up the environment that we all have not been taking care of. sadly the tax so far in canada does not reach to be shared with those that restore the environment.

  4. John Angelico via Facebook says:

    Not shock! but derision!

    • Betty Whiffin says:

      Agree. Not shock but derision all right. $1.50 tonne – laughable. By 2015 – laughable. There is some ulterior motive here and we will believe it when we see it. What good will it do anyway. Waste of breath. Those who live longest will see most!!!!

  5. Except, also:
    “pollutants such as sulfur dioxide, COD (chemical oxygen demand) and nitrogen oxide would be the first to incur tax and, as conditions matured, other emissions would be included”
    (from the story about this in the Australian)
    Seems their primary concern is to lessen pollution of the genuine old fashioned variety, which the western world mostly cleaned up long ago.

  6. China’s proposed ‘carbon dioxide tax’, if it ever see’s fruition, has more to do with symbolism than mitigating climate change.

    China will in no way impose restrictions on it’s energy intensive industries, such as steel making, as this will only affect it’s international competitiveness.

    The $1.50 per tonne price will not reduce global temperatures and will not be used as investments in ‘clean’ energies. The upcoming GFC Mark II will soon put a stopper on this little fortune cookie!

  7. Lew Skannen says:

    Baldrick is right. The tax is purely for show so that wankers like Combet can say “SEE! The Chinese are doing it! Let’s buy more green energy crap off them!”.
    There is no way this is even going to be implemented in any meaningful way.

  8. so china sets to boycot the eu aviation emissions tax, yet plans to introduce its own carbon tax. so carbon taxes are about revenue streams after all and nothing about climate…*cha ching*

  9. David Davidovics says:

    In three years they will introduce it…….maybe……

    As mentioned above, its nothing but posturing and grand standing. Enforcement will be another story.

    The chinese are used to playing this game (and I can’t say I blame them). Can’t wait to see the leftwing pundits championing this ‘landmark’ decision.

  10. the article i read in The Weekend Australian today
    quotes a Chinese spokesman “He said pollutants such as sulfur dioxide, COD (chemical oxygen demand) and nitrogen oxide would be the first to incur tax and, as conditions matured, other emissions would be included. The proposed tax would focus on big consumers of coal, crude oil and natural gas.”
    Is it genuine pollution they are considering taxing or CO2?

  11. Matthew Shaw via Facebook says:

    wow who pressured them in to that……. seems the west still has some power over china afterall.. unfortunately.. i was hoping they could be the posterchild for sensibility..

  12. Graham Chubb says:

    I doubt that the Chinese will be considering the environment with this tax.
    It will be a consumption tax on a progressive basis (the more you use the more you pay – the majority, at this stage, do not have domestic access to electricity). Manufacturing industries for export will probably be given an exemption. This is the logical way to go – unlike the stupid ‘western world’ who are proposing the opposite. Roll on the forthcoming self imposed depression, which should sort out the lunacy.

  13. doesn’t this actually undermine our grab-on tax, because of the low price ?

  14. V.N. Phoon via Facebook says:

    If you read into it, it says POSSIBLY, just wait for them to backflip on that

  15. cementafriend says:

    The chinese are good at saying things which people can interpret their way.
    Anyone who has some experience in Asian countries knows that a “yes” means “yes I understand” or “yes I do not understand”

  16. What you are missing is China already has a raft of taxes on other forms of pollution (e.g. transport fuels) that constitute a much higher total. $1.55 is equivalent to $10 in their economy per tonne CO2e which is not much lower than the $15 floor price in the Australian economy. You guys really need to do some proper research.

    Secondly as this is a fixed price scheme only for the first 3 years, it isn’t a tax at all. Its a price on carbon. Polluter pays. Like the following countries that also have put a price on carbon:

    South Africa
    South Korea
    New Zealand
    European Union
    Republic of Ireland
    United Kingdom
    Costa Rica
    North American States

    But don’t let a good story get in the way of the facts.

    Let the flaming begin.

    • Attaboy Ben!,

      Another key fact is that all of out Energy Intensive Trade Exposed industries (EITE as they are known) are being protected from the carbon price to the tune of either 94.5%, or 66%. So in fact, they are actually seeing a price of $1.27 per ton (@ 94.5% protection) and $7.60 per ton (@66%) protection.

      The other fact worth noting – is that nett of the EITE payments above – the carbon tax revenue is around ~$7 billion per annum, which in an economy of $950 billion per annum – is not going to cause economic Armageddon. Half of that $7 billion will then be thrown back to Aussie batlers and the other $3.5 billion will be used for R&D and projects.

      Even if you don’t like the tax or what the money will be spent upon – suggesting that it will cause financial destruction is both factually baseless and downright irresponsible.

      • Oopps sorry our GDP is more like $1,200 billion. So the tax is just over 0.5% – but most of it is being pumped back in, (. A waste you might say, silly you might say too – but economic disaster it is not.

        Particularly in th current environment, people should not be talking down our economy without some rational basis.

  17. It’s not acidification, because the sea cannot get acidic. Depletion of fish is everybody’s fault; for not listening to me!!!

    Lots of oils, fat ends up in the sea now than ever before. Chicken fat, pork, beef fat, canola, olive oil, industrial oils… they spread on the surface of the water. Water by splashing, suppose to replenish its oxygen. 2] oils prevent evaporation – when more water evaporates / collects oxygen in the clouds – less evaporation > less clouds > less rain > less oxygen. Very simple, unfortunately, the mountains of literature about the phony GLOBAL warming has clouded Skeptics brains, instead of clouds in the sky…

%d bloggers like this: