I've concluded carbon offset credits are generally a bad idea (not always). Not just because both science and pricing models are shaky, but because it is far too easy to use them like indulgences of the sort handed out by the medieval catholic church. Get out of jail free cards.
Conversation
Replying to
Climate action should focus primarily on actually re-engineering processes to decarbonize them. Not this dubious book-keeping game with rainforests and such.
3
2
51
Replying to
People will sin regardless. Might as well make some money off of it. Isn't this why states have lotteries?
1
Replying to
I tend to agree. Also, at introduction it can mean those coming from a lower base benefit more than leaders who are already optimised. Many then demand a bonus for what they should optimise anyway. Need to shape incentives to penalise bad behaviour.
1
Replying to
What do you think about adding a carbon tax on locally produced items, along with a carbon tariff on imported items, and using these funds to support research and development of carbon extraction technology such as:
news.mit.edu/2019/mit-engin
Replying to
The only people in the rooms that both put out climate solutions and get subsidized media visibility are politicians and bureaucrats. There are no petrol companies. They are all reborn as energy companies eager to sell VCS to eachother while they design and oversee the process.
Replying to
Yeah, offset credits feel like begging for a rerun of pay-to-play ratings agencies.
Do you see similar flaws cap and trade ie no points for sinks but sources must buy emission credits? I can’t think of any
Replying to
Like the daycare that added fees for late pickup & found things get worse because the fee was less than the implied social cost when no fee.
> "I had one family who were routinely late and I think it's just something that they built into their budget"
.
thestar.com/life/health_we
2







