As many of you know, carbon emissions are nowadays tradeable. This means that he allocation of CO2 emissions given to a country or central institution can be bought or sold by those who emit CO2 and greenhouse gasses so that a market of permissions is created.
This market can be clearly be made efficient by the use o blockchain, yet not completely decentralised I recon. Certification, rights of emission, participants proof of identity and exchanges are all a default in the blockchain world. This could save millions?
This market can be clearly be made efficient by the use o blockchain, yet not completely decentralised I recon. Certification, rights of emission, participants proof of identity and exchanges are all a default in the blockchain world. This could save millions?
Trading emission certificates is not really accessible to the individual
(if I overlooked a way to access the markets via specialized brokers or derivatives let me know, I actually looked for a way a couple of years ago but didn't find anything useful back then)
This is extremely weird. I did know about the carbon trading since it's not new but at the end it's plan of approaching a more CO2 free society failed terribly.
- they should not be tradable in the first place
- one should not buy or sell them
- special incentives might help smaller and greener nations.
It's not just carbon one has to worry about, I get the point of the author but what about the more dangerous gasses??
What is the credibility that the records won't be influenced by the developed nations? Plus they have not even considered per hecta green land available to the industry. They can very well try and make green belt. Rather this can be based on the whole net emission rather how it started!!l
Let's try and take the net emission of all gasses and rather calculate the effects that the greenbelt might produce on them then hold them accountable. This is not a business transaction.
- they should not be tradable in the first place
- one should not buy or sell them
- special incentives might help smaller and greener nations.
It's not just carbon one has to worry about, I get the point of the author but what about the more dangerous gasses??
What is the credibility that the records won't be influenced by the developed nations? Plus they have not even considered per hecta green land available to the industry. They can very well try and make green belt. Rather this can be based on the whole net emission rather how it started!!l
Let's try and take the net emission of all gasses and rather calculate the effects that the greenbelt might produce on them then hold them accountable. This is not a business transaction.
Being able to trade carbon emissions is not mutually exclusive with taking other preventive and proactive measures to tackle climate change.
If anything I believe the carbon certificate market should be available to the general public, as this would allow for speculation to drive the price up, making carbon emissions more expensive as a consequence.
