TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- What is the point....
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

What is the point....

Of having any sort of cap on GHG emissions if you have a carbon credit program that allows you, as a company, to sell your credits to other companies? I am all for implementing caps, but there are far too many companies that have very little emissions, and have excess credits they sell to companies that gobble up credits from a mass of companies. I really see no benefit. Discuss.

Everyone should be forced to ride bikes.

I think pretty much everybody except large corporations agrees with you.

quote:

Originally posted by jennypie Everyone should be forced to ride bikes.

That would actually be pretty awesome.

Disabled people get a special liscence to solar powered segways.

quote:

Originally posted by jennypie Everyone should be forced to ride bikes.

lol this is on the corporate side, not the consumer side. As in factory/power plant/etc emissions. All related to some sort of manufacturing in general.

quote:

Originally posted by Project-K I think pretty much everybody except large corporations agrees with you.

Probably.

It would help with the obesity/sedentary lifestyle problem too.

quote:

Originally posted by Project-K That would actually be pretty awesome. Disabled people get a special liscence to solar powered segways.

Why solar powered? They go 30miles total distance on a single charge. I am sure they could do it all in that distance. If not, I am sure there are some sort of kennel type places that would allow them to charge. lol

This is nothing more than a carbon swapping economy where a select few will make staggering amounts of money. Too bad I couldn't come up with shit like this. I could quit the daily grind, then.

I'd ride my bike all the fucking time if there were no cars around. As it is I risk my life every time I get on the road.

quote:

Originally posted by gehzumteufel Why solar powered? They go 30miles total distance on a single charge. I am sure they could do it all in that distance. If not, I am sure there are some sort of kennel type places that would allow them to charge. lol

It just makes them sound more awesome.

Hover bikes would be even better.

Here, let me explain:

U.S. money smells like vomit.

Meat187,

are u related to blink182?

quote:

Originally posted by jennypie It would help with the obesity/sedentary lifestyle problem too.

yeah totally.

quote:

Originally posted by Zoso This is nothing more than a carbon swapping economy where a select few will make staggering amounts of money. Too bad I couldn't come up with shit like this. I could quit the daily grind, then.

Yeah, I know. Fucking stupid though. Doesn't even help anything other than line the coffers of business.

quote:

Originally posted by Project-K I'd ride my bike all the fucking time if there were no cars around. As it is I risk my life every time I get on the road.

I really want a job that I can take the train to work every day. I don't want to have to take my car anymore.

quote:

Originally posted by Project-K It just makes them sound more awesome.

hahaha

quote:

Originally posted by jennypie U.S. money smells like vomit.

no way. smells nice

Sure, if you like puke smell!

quote:

Originally posted by Meat187 Here, let me explain: [IMG]http:://brentblog.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/dollars.jpg[/IMG]

lol yeah I know. fucking crock of shit.

quote:

Originally posted by jennypie U.S. money smells like vomit.

That is because you used it as lube.

Re: What is the point....

quote:

Originally posted by gehzumteufel Of having any sort of cap on GHG emissions if you have a carbon credit program that allows you, as a company, to sell your credits to other companies? I am all for implementing caps, but there are far too many companies that have very little emissions, and have excess credits they sell to companies that gobble up credits from a mass of companies. I really see no benefit. Discuss.

I'm guessing it acts as a financial incentive for companies not to pollute -- the ones who don't pollute will in effect be making more money, since they can sell their pollution credits to other companies. And the ultra-polluting companies will lose more money, since their inefficient (polluting) operations will require them by law to buy pollution credits from other companies.

In addition, there's the possibility for public criticism of companies that buy lots of credits / praise for ones who don't have to buy any credits, assuming that the information about who buys or sells credits is publicly available.

That's how I understand this at least, and it doesn't really seem like that terrible of an idea to me.

quote:

Originally posted by jennypie Everyone should be forced to ride bikes.

I will never agree to that. I mean, have you ever been in a 10 second car? I live my life a quarter mile at a time. Nothing else matters: not the mortgage, not the store, not my team and all their bullshit. For those ten seconds or less, I'm free. Ask any racer, any real racer. It doesn't matter if you win by an inch or a mile; winning's winning.

quote:

Originally posted by SuspicionVandit I will never agree to that. I mean, have you ever been in a 10 second car? I live my life a quarter mile at a time. Nothing else matters: not the mortgage, not the store, not my team and all their bullshit. For those ten seconds or less, I'm free. Ask any racer, any real racer. It doesn't matter if you win by an inch or a mile; winning's winning.

Re: What is the point....

quote:

Originally posted by gehzumteufel Of having any sort of cap on GHG emissions if you have a carbon credit program that allows you, as a company, to sell your credits to other companies? I am all for implementing caps, but there are far too many companies that have very little emissions, and have excess credits they sell to companies that gobble up credits from a mass of companies. I really see no benefit. Discuss.

The emissions produced by many companies are higher than they need to be because to reduce them would cost money. If they have to spend money either way, e.g. by purchasing these credits, then in some cases the cost of simply reducing emissions might be lower, in which case it would provide an incentive for them to follow more "environmentally friendly" practices.

Of course, the point of all of this is questionable if you ask me. Even if we reduce the rate of emissions here, it will be more than offset by increased emissions in China and India. There comes a point in time when you have to give up on saving a sinking ship and just try to get as many people to the life raft as you can, and if you ask me we're well past that time with regards to this particular issue...

Re: Re: What is the point....

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles I'm guessing it acts as a financial incentive for companies not to pollute -- the ones who don't pollute will in effect be making more money, since they can sell their pollution credits to other companies. And the ultra-polluting companies will lose more money, since their inefficient (polluting) operations will require them by law to buy pollution credits from other companies. In addition, there's the possibility for public criticism of companies that buy lots of credits / praise for ones who don't have to buy any credits, assuming that the information about who buys or sells credits is publicly available. That's how I understand this at least, and it doesn't really seem like that terrible of an idea to me.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter The emissions produced by many companies are higher than they need to be because to reduce them would cost money. If they have to spend money either way, e.g. by purchasing these credits, then in some cases the cost of simply reducing emissions might be lower, in which case it would provide an incentive for them to follow more "environmentally friendly" practices. Of course, the point of all of this is questionable if you ask me. Even if we reduce the rate of emissions here, it will be more than offset by increased emissions in China and India. There comes a point in time when you have to give up on saving a sinking ship and just try to get as many people to the life raft as you can, and if you ask me we're well past that time with regards to this particular issue...

While you both have mostly sound arguments, it hinges on assuming this program does not exist today. While they are talking about "creating" this carbon credit program in this new bill that CNN and the rest of the news media is talking about, the program already exists. Companies have been buying and selling carbon credits for years. You can find lots of info on it.

Also, just allowing the credits to be purchased, doesn't really effect the bottom line that much. It is just like the fine for using illegal workers. They make more money in a single day off the illegals they employ than the fines cost them in 1 year. In most places anyways. The cost of the carbon credit program, far outweighs the cost of upgrading, as it is cheaper than upgrading or implementing these controls.

Oh and on the China and India thing, I agree. Pretty much a lost cause. China is way to corrupt to care, and puts people in jail when they make a big deal about a lake having the toxicity levels being straight out of the simpsons movie.

Re: Re: Re: What is the point....

The best thing to do would probably be to increase the fines -- make them more of a deterrent than they currently are.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.