[geeks] Global Warming questions...
shannon at widomaker.com
Mon Dec 3 17:58:51 CST 2007
On Dec 3, 2007, at 7:01 AM, Frank Van Damme wrote:
> On Dec 3, 2007 12:34 PM, Phil Stracchino <alaric at metrocast.net> wrote:
>> Lionel Peterson wrote:
>>> My thought is that if someone wants to claim to be carbon-neutral,
>>> you have to
>>> start with securing sufficient plants to "scrub" your carbon
>>> dioxide output
>>> back to oxygen. THen we can talk about buying carbon credits for
>>> cars, planes,
>> This whole business of buying carbon offsets and credits is BS in the
>> first place. It's just like buying indulgences from the Pope in the
>> middle ages. "Sure it's a sin, but it's OK, I just gave the Pope
>> hundred gold sovereigns."
> Not exactly. It's based on
> 1. distributing the right to emit a limited amount of CO2 per capita,
> evenly spread over the earth's population
You are right, in theory.
The reality is that this has been used to both avoid any real cuts in
pollution and in many cases increase it, all while complying with some
pie-in-the-sky 'green' initiative.
> 2. arranging for the trade of the emission rights since some countries
> will have a harder time then others to recude CO2 output (reliance on
> heavy industry,...)
> So the goal is to minimize the global economical cost of reducing CO2
> emissions. Free trade can be an efficient tool for this.
That's not free trade, that's heavily managed trade.
"Where some they sell their dreams for small desires."
More information about the geeks