3 ms·

Precisely because credits are not really a commodity, so some buyers have preferences about what credits to buy and how much they are willing to pay. There are

Precisely because credits are not really a commodity, so some buyers have preferences about what credits to buy and how much they are willing to pay. There are some subset of buyers and sellers who pretend that all credits are the same, but usually that's an excuse to pay for the cheapest possible credits (which in many cases achieve nothing).

moralestapia 4y ago
Just wanted to say I agree that your credits are of much better quality than the average of what you usually find on the market. Carbon credits right now are like the new (but also old?) shitcoins. I have a startup in this space but we mostly do MRV, always looking for solutions like yours to link to our clients and contribute to this new economy. Send me an email (check profile) to get in touch!
wcoenen 4y ago
If these credits are higher quality as claimed, then they should sell at a higher price, not lower.
- scrollaway 4y ago
  Selling high quality credits at a higher price isn’t really accomplishing the goal of maximising climate impact. If you just want to get rich, work in finance.
  - wcoenen 4y ago
    Selling at a higher price means more revenue, more revenue means the business can expand faster, faster expansion means climate impact of refrigerants gets solved faster.
    - scrollaway 4y ago
      If selling at a higher price meant more revenue, everything would be priced infinitely high.
      - wcoenen 4y ago
        Obviously, one cannot simply choose to sell above market price. But the context of the discussion was about the reason for selling far below market price.
        scrollaway 4y ago
        You missed that its not below market price, its below market price for the quality. But most companies don’t buy based on quality of credits but based on how cheap they are so they can get away with polluting. This is counterproductive and pricing those credits higher will lead to them not being as useful as they can be. And honestly: I find it very arrogant to think that you can show up and propose this “crazy idea” that “hey what if you guys made more money you could do more good”, as if that hasn’t been considered…
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]

moralestapia 4y ago

Just wanted to say I agree that your credits are of much better quality than the average of what you usually find on the market. Carbon credits right now are like the new (but also old?) shitcoins. I have a startup in this space but we mostly do MRV, always looking for solutions like yours to link to our clients and contribute to this new economy. Send me an email (check profile) to get in touch!

wcoenen 4y ago

If these credits are higher quality as claimed, then they should sell at a higher price, not lower.

scrollaway 4y ago
Selling high quality credits at a higher price isn’t really accomplishing the goal of maximising climate impact. If you just want to get rich, work in finance.
- wcoenen 4y ago
  Selling at a higher price means more revenue, more revenue means the business can expand faster, faster expansion means climate impact of refrigerants gets solved faster.
  - scrollaway 4y ago
    If selling at a higher price meant more revenue, everything would be priced infinitely high.
    - wcoenen 4y ago
      Obviously, one cannot simply choose to sell above market price. But the context of the discussion was about the reason for selling far below market price.
      - scrollaway 4y ago
        You missed that its not below market price, its below market price for the quality. But most companies don’t buy based on quality of credits but based on how cheap they are so they can get away with polluting. This is counterproductive and pricing those credits higher will lead to them not being as useful as they can be. And honestly: I find it very arrogant to think that you can show up and propose this “crazy idea” that “hey what if you guys made more money you could do more good”, as if that hasn’t been considered…
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]