what is the future for global warming issue?

Global warming as a international environmental issue, needs global cooperation to lower its level. Besides all possible solutions mentioned before, there must be more solutions that can help us solve the problem. Further investments on scientific researches are essential. The key to global warming is that getting more involvements is crucial. When talking about the involvements, developed countries have more responsibility than less developed countries. Since they are stronger at financial and technological departments, developed countries should set a model that others can following them.

There is no doubt that the environment is becoming more and more valuable now. More struggles will form during solving process, so that a more powerful institution is expected to build up in the future; which has a strong control over all countries. At most circumstances, the role of the institution is expected to be a peace maker that help all the countries to solve the issue successfully and effectively.

On the other hand, personal actions are also very helpful to lower the threats of global warming. Education of younger generation can work more for the future of entire ecosystem.

Carbon tax: a price control mechanism

There is another alternative way to lower the speed of global warming process is a price-type control mechanism. To be more specific, it is internationally harmonized carbon tax. William D. Nordhaus’ study is on analyzing about “the relationship to ultimate targets, performance under conditions of uncertainty, volatility of induced carbon prices, the inefficiencies of taxation and regulation, potential for corruption and accounting finagling, and ease of implementation.”(26) His conclusion is that the price-type approaches work far more effective comparing with quantity-oriented mechanisms such as the Kyoto Protocol. 

         About the price approaches to climate change, the principle subject been discussed in the paper is called harmonized carbon taxes. It is “a dynamically efficient Pigovian tax that balances the discounted social marginal costs and marginal benefits of additional emissions.” (35) From the context of his research, under the price control approaches, there are no binding limits of the emission, which is different with the Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto Protocol sets a limit level of carbon emission for all members. On the contrary, the price approaches is a widely agreement of countries that they have a carbon price or carbon tax as an internationally used penalty for carbon emissions. Under this approaches, there is no allowed emission quota, no trading between members of the emission; this represents that countries have to pay for every single ton of carbon dioxide that they produced. This is a powerful constraint for both developing countries and also developed countries. Under the price-type method, all countries now have to pay for what they have done to the environment by dumping extra carbon dioxide.

Nordhaus, William D. "To Tax or Not to Tax: Alternative Approaches to Slowing Global WarmingTo Tax or Not to Tax: Alternative Approaches to Slowing Global Warming." Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 1.1 (2007): 26-44. Print.

Benefits of the global carbon market

The greatest benefit of creating a global carbon market is that it can reduce the carbon emission effectively. This method can achieve a much better outcome than depend on individual country’s direct influence on reducing the carbon dioxide emission. Countries can seek financial subsidy from selling carbon emission quota if they have extra ones. On the other hand, most of the developed countries need more emission quota due to the out of date infrastructures and large footprint on average, which caused by the luxury living style. When we put poor countries together with developed countries, it is doubtless that, on average, those developed countries have much higher carbon emission on average. (Tavoni, 5394)

(http://www.csrplus.co.uk/blog/?p=3175)

The motivation of installing cleaner technology will be larger compared with no economic benefit, before the appearing of global carbon market. Under the global carbon market, even though it cost an enormous amount of money and also time, it is still worthwhile for developed countries to do so. This will help to increase the rate of updating existing infrastructures in developed countries, although the cost is remarkably high. If the developed countries do not replace the past and high energy concentrated infrastructures by new ones, penalty may be extremely high. The result is that they will have to pay for the penalty every year. The global market can provide an opportunity to balance out the carbon emission globally. At the same time, maintain a theoretical and rational emission level to promote human save the earth.

On the other hand, the carbon cycle will be fully open to all without any regulation, which may lead to the tragedy of maximum exploitation. When we look at the carbon market, a protocol like Kyoto Protocol is particularly valuable to the entire global economy chain. The protocol now imposes restrictions on most countries that are in the protocol; this will limit some expansion of the factories and similar industrial developments. At that time, not only it is extremely difficult to control the global carbon emission, but also prevent the situation become even worse. Giving a subsidy for countries that contribute lowering carbon emission and posing penalties on the ones that do not follow the rules, it works much better than only depend on consciousness especially when it applies to poor countries.

Tavoni, Massimo, Brent Sohngen, and Valentina Bosetti. "Forestry and the Carbon Market Response to Stabilize Climate." Energy Policy 35.11 (2007): 5346-353. Print.