<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Umbra on carbon trading]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by rufwork http://www.grist.org/article/a-tip-of-the-cap1/ Sun, 29 Jun 2008 23:06:13 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/a-tip-of-the-cap1/1 Caps and quos

"The cap should be lower than the status quo."

How often does that happen?  That is, and I ask this respectfully, was the above quote a political statement or an accurate rendering of how cap systems routinely work?

]]> Caps and quos

"The cap should be lower than the status quo."

How often does that happen?  That is, and I ask this respectfully, was the above quote a political statement or an accurate rendering of how cap systems routinely work?

]]> Comment #2 by texasjenny http://www.grist.org/article/a-tip-of-the-cap1/ Mon, 30 Jun 2008 03:38:56 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/a-tip-of-the-cap1/2 Retiring credits

Another important aspect of cap-and-trade systems is that non-profits are able to purchase credits and retire them. Also, the governing body can incorporate gradual reductions in available credits into the systems, in order to further push technological innovation. Both of these result in fewer emissions allowed throughout the entire industry governed by the trading system.

]]> Retiring credits

Another important aspect of cap-and-trade systems is that non-profits are able to purchase credits and retire them. Also, the governing body can incorporate gradual reductions in available credits into the systems, in order to further push technological innovation. Both of these result in fewer emissions allowed throughout the entire industry governed by the trading system.

]]> Comment #3 by Kelii127 http://www.grist.org/article/a-tip-of-the-cap1/ Mon, 30 Jun 2008 04:50:10 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/a-tip-of-the-cap1/3 Wrong definition of a "carbon offset"

"The carbon offset is a consumer product that you or I could buy, enabling us to mildly compensate for our greenhouse-gas emissions by supporting renewable-energy projects."

This is incorrect. Voluntary carbon offsets are generated from projects that DIRECTLY reduce, destroy, sequester or avoid the emission of greenhouse gases, e.g. through the construction of anaerobic digesters at farms that reduce methane emissions from manure, or systems that capture landfill gas emissions.

The definition you provide above actually describes voluntary renewable energy certificates (RECs). RECs support renewable energy projects, which can result in INDIRECT emission reductions, since they generate essentially carbon free electricity.

RECs are sometimes appropriately used to "offset" indirect emissions from the energy we use, and sometimes they are used inappropriately to offset direct emissions. However, they should not be used to offset direct emission reductions (like those from your car). For those emissions, voluntary offsets should be used.

Of course, one should try to reduce their footprint as much as possible before offsetting.

Finally, inflammatory comparisons like "I'm sorry I'm repeatedly choosing to break your leg, let me apologize by funding medical training in Zimbabwe," are ridiculous and discourage conscientious people from engaging in a very positive, managable action that individuals can do to combat climate change. I offset because I know I can't live an entirely impact-free life. I address the impacts I do leave by doing something proactive about them.

]]> Wrong definition of a "carbon offset"

"The carbon offset is a consumer product that you or I could buy, enabling us to mildly compensate for our greenhouse-gas emissions by supporting renewable-energy projects."

This is incorrect. Voluntary carbon offsets are generated from projects that DIRECTLY reduce, destroy, sequester or avoid the emission of greenhouse gases, e.g. through the construction of anaerobic digesters at farms that reduce methane emissions from manure, or systems that capture landfill gas emissions.

The definition you provide above actually describes voluntary renewable energy certificates (RECs). RECs support renewable energy projects, which can result in INDIRECT emission reductions, since they generate essentially carbon free electricity.

RECs are sometimes appropriately used to "offset" indirect emissions from the energy we use, and sometimes they are used inappropriately to offset direct emissions. However, they should not be used to offset direct emission reductions (like those from your car). For those emissions, voluntary offsets should be used.

Of course, one should try to reduce their footprint as much as possible before offsetting.

Finally, inflammatory comparisons like "I'm sorry I'm repeatedly choosing to break your leg, let me apologize by funding medical training in Zimbabwe," are ridiculous and discourage conscientious people from engaging in a very positive, managable action that individuals can do to combat climate change. I offset because I know I can't live an entirely impact-free life. I address the impacts I do leave by doing something proactive about them.

]]> Comment #4 by IHeartBiochar http://www.grist.org/article/a-tip-of-the-cap1/ Mon, 30 Jun 2008 05:02:34 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/a-tip-of-the-cap1/4 Very well said, Kelii127

Just what I was thinking. :) Umbra, you have written more recently (and accurately!) about carbon offsets than the 2005 column about RECS - here:
http://www.grist.org/advice/ask/2007/10/15/index.html
Recently, a number of voluntary offset standards have been developed that certify carbon offsets for quality and, sometimes, additional social and environmental benefits. The Stockholm Environment Institute put out this report in March. Maybe it's worth a column?

]]> Very well said, Kelii127

Just what I was thinking. :) Umbra, you have written more recently (and accurately!) about carbon offsets than the 2005 column about RECS - here:
http://www.grist.org/advice/ask/2007/10/15/index.html
Recently, a number of voluntary offset standards have been developed that certify carbon offsets for quality and, sometimes, additional social and environmental benefits. The Stockholm Environment Institute put out this report in March. Maybe it's worth a column?

]]> Comment #5 by drosenblum http://www.grist.org/article/a-tip-of-the-cap1/ Mon, 30 Jun 2008 23:36:58 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/a-tip-of-the-cap1/5 But a Carbon Tax is Far Superior

You left out a discussion of the problems with cap-and-trade.  Here's a quick summary from our Carbon Tax Center web site:

   1. Carbon taxes will lend predictability to energy prices, whereas cap-and-trade systems will aggravate the price volatility that historically has discouraged investments in less carbon-intensive electricity generation, carbon-reducing energy efficiency and carbon-replacing renewable energy.
   2. Carbon taxes can be implemented much sooner than complex cap-and-trade systems. Because of the urgency of the climate crisis, we do not have the luxury of waiting while the myriad details of a cap-and-trade system are resolved through lengthy negotiations.
   3. Carbon taxes are transparent and easily understandable, making them more likely to elicit the necessary public support than an opaque and difficult to understand cap-and-trade system.
   4. Carbon taxes can be implemented with far less opportunity for manipulation by special interests, while a cap-and-trade system's complexity opens it to exploitation by special interests and perverse incentives that can undermine public confidence and undercut its effectiveness.
   5. Carbon taxes address emissions of carbon from every sector, whereas cap-and-trade systems discussed to date have only targeted the electricity industry, which accounts for less than 40% of emissions.
   6. Carbon tax revenues can be returned to the public through dividends or progressive tax-shifting, while the costs of cap-and-trade systems are likely to become a hidden tax as dollars flow to market participants, lawyers and consultants.

For details, see our issue paper carbon taxes versus cap-and-trade.

Dan Rosenblum
Co-Director
Carbon Tax Center








]]> But a Carbon Tax is Far Superior

You left out a discussion of the problems with cap-and-trade.  Here's a quick summary from our Carbon Tax Center web site:

   1. Carbon taxes will lend predictability to energy prices, whereas cap-and-trade systems will aggravate the price volatility that historically has discouraged investments in less carbon-intensive electricity generation, carbon-reducing energy efficiency and carbon-replacing renewable energy.
   2. Carbon taxes can be implemented much sooner than complex cap-and-trade systems. Because of the urgency of the climate crisis, we do not have the luxury of waiting while the myriad details of a cap-and-trade system are resolved through lengthy negotiations.
   3. Carbon taxes are transparent and easily understandable, making them more likely to elicit the necessary public support than an opaque and difficult to understand cap-and-trade system.
   4. Carbon taxes can be implemented with far less opportunity for manipulation by special interests, while a cap-and-trade system's complexity opens it to exploitation by special interests and perverse incentives that can undermine public confidence and undercut its effectiveness.
   5. Carbon taxes address emissions of carbon from every sector, whereas cap-and-trade systems discussed to date have only targeted the electricity industry, which accounts for less than 40% of emissions.
   6. Carbon tax revenues can be returned to the public through dividends or progressive tax-shifting, while the costs of cap-and-trade systems are likely to become a hidden tax as dollars flow to market participants, lawyers and consultants.

For details, see our issue paper carbon taxes versus cap-and-trade.

Dan Rosenblum
Co-Director
Carbon Tax Center








]]> Comment #6 by wormmainea http://www.grist.org/article/a-tip-of-the-cap1/ Tue, 01 Jul 2008 02:10:44 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/a-tip-of-the-cap1/6 Carbon credits

They should be called carbon indulgences!  

Paying a measly sum to drive Hummer/Escalade/Yukon/[insert other gas pig here] back and forth to woek does not buy you credit, it only pays for you to feel better about your sin of hubris and stupidity!

]]> Carbon credits

They should be called carbon indulgences!  

Paying a measly sum to drive Hummer/Escalade/Yukon/[insert other gas pig here] back and forth to woek does not buy you credit, it only pays for you to feel better about your sin of hubris and stupidity!

]]> Comment #7 by JohnS http://www.grist.org/article/a-tip-of-the-cap1/ Fri, 04 Jul 2008 09:10:22 -0700 http://www.grist.org/article/a-tip-of-the-cap1/7 Carbon credits

Seems to me it allows the big boys to "do it later no mater who is harmed NOW".
I wish that we could get the trickle down benefits form this with say speeding tickets.. Gee ossifer my other car is home in the yard and I know the speeding credits are good on that car so I was only doing twice the speed limit one for this car and one limit for my other car so you can't give me a speeding ticket.
Do not these people realize that they are KILLING them selves as well as us!!

]]> Carbon credits

Seems to me it allows the big boys to "do it later no mater who is harmed NOW".
I wish that we could get the trickle down benefits form this with say speeding tickets.. Gee ossifer my other car is home in the yard and I know the speeding credits are good on that car so I was only doing twice the speed limit one for this car and one limit for my other car so you can't give me a speeding ticket.
Do not these people realize that they are KILLING them selves as well as us!!

]]>