'It seemed a little suspicious that we could get money for doing nothing'
CCX sells rip-offsets 3
-
Posted 4:04 PM on 21 Oct 2008
by Joseph Romm -
Posted in
-
Read More About
Joseph Romm is the editor of Climate Progress and a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress.
Related Stories
‘Copenhagen Diagnosis’ offers a grim update to the IPCC’s climate science
Top 25 reasons to give a damn about climate change
Make the kids pay: The economic effects of climate change on future generations
Add a Comment
You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.
Comments
View as Flat
rsmith02 Posted 3:49 am
22 Oct 2008
http://www.naag.org
Permalink
jimbeyer Posted 4:42 am
22 Oct 2008
Any big corporation could get around the additionality requirement if they wanted to.
Heck, I will eat less and stop exercising. So my CO2 output should drop. Pay up!
I would blame CCX as much as I would the characteristics of the system they are marketing.
You ask: "How can you possibly develop a commodity that has financial value by selling a commodity that should have no financial value?"
You do this by having the gov't mandate a system that makes no practical sense!
You need to have a carbon tax, but that is politically unpopular to say. So instead we go with Cap and Trade which will benefit no one except the likes of Mr. Sandor.
Build plugin hybrids that run on renewable methane. That's all that's needed.
Permalink
Gordon Parish Posted 4:56 am
22 Oct 2008
I posted on your earlier carbon rip-offsets blog from October 8 re: the Washington Post article, and I saw the WSJ article this morning.
Unfortunately, the topics moved fast, and I'm not sure my previous blog was read. I have reservations about the context/accuracy of both articles. Though I'm sure there are some abuses, there are guidelines that I've found are typically enforced.
I am presently at the Solid Waste Association of North America's WASTECON convention in Tampa, and I spoke with Dr. Jean Bogner for a bit after her keynote presentation - she has done some advisory work with CCX. I also spoke with two women from the US EPA LMOP program, and they had seen some of the recent articles, and are familiar with some of the landfills, and they believe the journalists have not represented those cases particularly accurately.
http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2008/10/7/133130/569
Permalink