Mapping the world's opinions

argument top image

< Back to question What are the positions on Global Warming? Show more Show less

Global warning has been a major concern for climate scientists for a few decades now. However, polling shows public discourse remains divided as to how real it is, what causes it and how to react to it.

Scientific consensus on climate change fans Show more Show less

Those willing to follow the evidence in climate science wherever it leads. Namely, that global warming is real, human-caused and disrupting. That said, there's nothing inherently wrong with all technology and modern life.
(1 of 3) Next position >


Regulate industry, impose a carbon tax, then let the free market take flight from there. It will eventually take us to desirable CO2 levels.
(1 of 1) Next argument >


Carbon emissions are a primary force in climate change. A large part of global production and modern day life relies on fossil fuels, which use the combustion of carbon to run machinery or produce electricity. When carbon-based fossil fuels combust, the carbon bonds with oxygen in the air, and carbon dioxide (CO2) is released as a gaseous product. CO2 is what’s known as a greenhouse gas- when released into the atmosphere it traps heat, contributing to global warming and climate change. Carbon dioxide is one of the biggest causes of climate change.

The Argument

A carbon tax is a system that would regulate the industry to incentivize the reduction of CO2 emissions. Producers would be required to pay a tax whenever they use carbon in a way that will release carbon dioxide.[1] Much manufacturing relies on carbon usage, and it is deeply ingrained in the global economy, so many feel that it is not economically realistic to cut it out of production. The carbon tax solves this by making carbon-based fuel usage more expensive, incentivizing producers to transition toward clean energy solutions. This would help the environment by lowering CO2 emissions but avoid many of the economic difficulties associated with transitioning to a lower-carbon economy. [2]The economy would be regulated in such a way that businesses are not forced to lower fossil fuel usage, but the policies simply make it better for everyone if CO2 emissions are reduced.

Counter arguments

Carbon taxes simply reduce consumption of fossil fuel-based energy but don’t necessarily support the usage of renewable energy. Making fossil fuels expensive can reduce their usage, but it doesn’t support renewable energy by default. People will only consume so much less energy, so it can help the issue, but not fully transition society to renewable energy.


This argument inherently accepts the beliefs that climate change is occurring, and that carbon emissions play a role in it.


[P1] Carbon emissions contribute to climate change. [P2] A carbon tax will reduce carbon emissions.

Rejecting the premises




This page was last edited on Thursday, 18 Jun 2020 at 20:01 UTC


Not sure yet? Read more before voting ↑