3 ms·
> The way the system was supposed to work was simple enough: The EU would set an annual cap on its overall emissions, then issue various emitters a certain numb
by Scoundreller 3y ago
> The way the system was supposed to work was simple enough: The EU would set an annual cap on its overall emissions, then issue various emitters a certain number of EU allowances. Each EUA would entitle its holder to emit one ton of carbon.
I'm a serial pirate and I'll only do worse next year. Can you pay me to pirate a bit less next year, while giving nothing to those that never pirated at all?
- Swenrekcah 3y agoIt’s not really comparable because the pollution was being generated as a byproduct of a presumably useful service or industry. This puts polluters under a regulatory limit that didn’t exist before, gives the time to adjust while also providing an early incentive to decarbonise sooner rather than later (they can sell the credits they didn’t need to use).
- thworp 3y agoYes that is totally comparable. After all, those emitters didn't do anything of use to anyone. It's especially bad when you consider that there countries that have successfully prevented this industrial crime: Afghanistan, Chad, Ethiopia, Madagascar, Laos...
- pi-e-sigma 3y agoYou forgot China and the US. Now your list is not that impressive, is it?