(via FCRN) Australia, home of the Hole in the Ozone Layer, is also home to a bunch of farmers who are not happy about the idea of taxes on the polluting product they produce:

Meat, especially beef, dairy products and wool could cost a lot more if farmers are required to buy permits under the Federal Government’s planned greenhouse emissions trading scheme, a farm policy think tank says. Because of the high methane emissions from cattle, beef could cost almost 25% more in 21 years and 5% more in 11 years, the Australian Farm Institute says…

Billions of dollars’ worth of meat and milk production could cease, as farmers decided they would be unable to pass on their permit costs to overseas buyers. The lost production could be worth almost $11 billion by 2030.

[snip]

By 2030 consumers could pay 15%c more for sheepmeat, 10% extra for dairy, 5% more for pork and 25% more for wool if farmers pass on the cost of permits.

Such rises might result in changed eating patterns as people buy less meat, Mr Pearce said. The projections are based on a scenario in which all farmers become part of the trading scheme in 2016 with free permits, but each year must pay for an increasing portion of permits until 2026, when none are free. Although farms are big greenhouse gas emitters - particularly of methane from livestock, crops and fertiliser - the Government has initially excluded them from the scheme, which it wants to introduce in July next year. It has said they could be included from 2015 and has pledged to let them know in four years.

[snip]

“Agricultural production will decline and exports will decline, particularly in meat-based industries, and there are economy-wide implications for that,” Mr Pearce said. This was a “worst case scenario”, he said. Farmers might grow more crops and reduce animal numbers, or turn to more upmarket beef and dairy products, so their carbon cost for each animal would be lower, he said.

This report does NOT seem threatening to me because of the following:

• 25% over 21 years is pretty slow, and $11 billion by 2030 is tiny in relation to the Australian economy ($1.08 trillion in 2008).
• All of these effects depend on what is done elsewhere with GHGs. If other exporters also tax them, the price increases EVERYWHERE will not make Aussies lose market share, BUT they will cause people to shift from meat, which is the point.
• Higher prices ARE the point of taxing GHGs!
• This study was done by industry, so you know where their bias lies…

Bottom Line: The best way to reduce a “harmful” behavior is by making it more expensive. Those who have gotten by for “free” all these years (meat producers and eaters) will have to pay for their “sins” in the future…