Your editorial on Dec. 6, “Climate report sets right goals for Maine,” correctly stated that “there is no low-cost option when it comes to climate change.” Many changes are needed. Some will be costly. 

The Maine Climate Council considered which to recommend to the Legislature and governor to activate. We must trust they will move appropriately to have our state meet its stated goals of reducing emissions 45% by 2030 and 80% by 2050. 

Sen. Angus King, in a congratulatory speech for the unveiling of the Climate Council’s Plan, noted that Maine on its own cannot do it all. He’s right. Maine contributes 0.3% of the nation’s emissions, while the nation’s emissions are 15% of the global total. It will take federal action to encourage domestic and international emissions reductions. Sen. King said he’s ready for that. 

So what plan should he take to the Senate to make the greatest reduction in national emissions, and to incentivize international action? The answer is cash-back carbon pricing. That’s the advice of 3,589 U.S. economists, the World Bank and the IPCC. 

Cash-back carbon pricing has already been introduced into Congress on a bipartisan basis. In it, all revenues from a rising price on carbon pollution would be returned in equal shares to all U.S. citizens. A border adjustment will protect U.S. businesses and incentivize international adoption. The U.S. needs to join the 80% of its trading partners who already price their carbon emissions in some way! 

Independent studies show that this cashback policy will predominantly benefit low- and middle-income Americans and spur economic growth across income levels. It will also save lives from pollution-related respiratory illnesses, and climate-related extreme weather events. 

Rep. Chellie Pingree is a co-sponsor of that proposal, Rep. Jared Golden understands it, and Sen. Collins made a similar proposal in 2009. Sen. King should take the lead now.

Peter Garrett

Winslow