3 ms·

Carbon credits is this weird market, where the product is some positive externality. No one in the market has any incentive to be honest. The buyer of the carb

Carbon credits is this weird market, where the product is some positive externality. No one in the market has any incentive to be honest. The buyer of the carbon credits doesn't actually need the carbon to be captured. They just want a certificate for X credits, so they can emit elsewhere or get some other benefit. The seller doesn't actually need to capture the carbon. As long as they can make a convincing enough case to the buyer that they did capture the carbon, the buyer is happy to buy. It's pretty much exactly the same as the plastic recycling market in Canada. The plastic waste is actually just shipped/sold to Asia. Not actually recycled.

verisimi 2y ago
Yes, it's a made up product (no one sees or wants 'carbon credits' like they want actual resources), a legislative illusion (the experience is a "y/n" on a screen, digital certificate shuffling), and an exercise in extending trust to the bureaucracy (if 80% or 90% of certs were fake, would anyone know?). What a waste of everyone's time. But the consumer is meant to pay extra taxes for the privilege on their bills.
moring 2y ago
Sometimes the only incentive is bad things that happen to you if you get caught. This has been true for pollution before carbon credits. > The buyer of the carbon credits doesn't actually need the carbon to be captured. They just want a certificate for X credits, so they can emit elsewhere or get some other benefit. This is correct, and I think works as intended. The problem on the buyer's side is that the buyer has no incentive to emit no more than allowed by the certificates bought. This has to be verified, and the buyer punished for violation. > The seller doesn't actually need to capture the carbon. As long as they can make a convincing enough case to the buyer that they did capture the carbon, the buyer is happy to buy. The problem here isn't the buyer. Instead, the seller should have to prove that carbon has been captured before getting any carbon credits in the first place -- again, with punishment for violation.
- verisimi 2y ago
  Say you went to a state of the art carbon sequestering facility, and you see the machine pumping away, what can you verify? Do you trust bureaucrats to correctly measure an invisible 'good', that will be hidden/"stored" inaccessibly underground? It's a world away from tangible goods, eg cars in a production line, or water in pipes. The whole business remains entirely invisible and has scam written all over it.
  - TylerE 2y ago
    I trust the bureaucrats a hell of a lot more than the hypercapitalists.
    - verisimi 2y ago
      You realise the capitalists write the legislation (via lobbyists) for the bureaucrats?
      - happymellon 2y ago
        So "worst case" they have the same view?
        verisimi 2y ago
        No - its that they are in it together, working to (parasitically) extract even more wealth from the people creating the wealth. When you use law to change the conditions, eg by creating a new product (carbon) that is invisible but licensed and that everyone is going to pay (on their bills) - ie a new wheeze or tax - you won't get acceptance without some sort of show.
  - saulrh 2y ago
    You absolutely can measure that, in the same way that you measure that manufacturers are producing cars that don't emit nitrogen oxides above regulated limits or that manufacturers aren't dumping cadmium into nearby rivers or that worksites aren't making employees work on telephone poles without safety gear: You have an organization that reads all the relevant research, develops tests, runs those tests, and is empowered to Apply Consequences To violators. You don't trust some anonymous "bureaucrats", you trust a dedicated organization of subject matter experts and specialist inspectors that know how things are supposed to work and understand all the dodgy tricks that people are going to pull. This is how we went from The Jungle and Silent Spring and the hole in the ozone layer to where we are today. This approach works.

verisimi 2y ago

Yes, it's a made up product (no one sees or wants 'carbon credits' like they want actual resources), a legislative illusion (the experience is a "y/n" on a screen, digital certificate shuffling), and an exercise in extending trust to the bureaucracy (if 80% or 90% of certs were fake, would anyone know?). What a waste of everyone's time. But the consumer is meant to pay extra taxes for the privilege on their bills.

moring 2y ago

Sometimes the only incentive is bad things that happen to you if you get caught. This has been true for pollution before carbon credits. > The buyer of the carbon credits doesn't actually need the carbon to be captured. They just want a certificate for X credits, so they can emit elsewhere or get some other benefit. This is correct, and I think works as intended. The problem on the buyer's side is that the buyer has no incentive to emit no more than allowed by the certificates bought. This has to be verified, and the buyer punished for violation. > The seller doesn't actually need to capture the carbon. As long as they can make a convincing enough case to the buyer that they did capture the carbon, the buyer is happy to buy. The problem here isn't the buyer. Instead, the seller should have to prove that carbon has been captured before getting any carbon credits in the first place -- again, with punishment for violation.

verisimi 2y ago
Say you went to a state of the art carbon sequestering facility, and you see the machine pumping away, what can you verify? Do you trust bureaucrats to correctly measure an invisible 'good', that will be hidden/"stored" inaccessibly underground? It's a world away from tangible goods, eg cars in a production line, or water in pipes. The whole business remains entirely invisible and has scam written all over it.
- TylerE 2y ago
  I trust the bureaucrats a hell of a lot more than the hypercapitalists.
  - verisimi 2y ago
    You realise the capitalists write the legislation (via lobbyists) for the bureaucrats?
    - happymellon 2y ago
      So "worst case" they have the same view?
      - verisimi 2y ago
        No - its that they are in it together, working to (parasitically) extract even more wealth from the people creating the wealth. When you use law to change the conditions, eg by creating a new product (carbon) that is invisible but licensed and that everyone is going to pay (on their bills) - ie a new wheeze or tax - you won't get acceptance without some sort of show.
- saulrh 2y ago
  You absolutely can measure that, in the same way that you measure that manufacturers are producing cars that don't emit nitrogen oxides above regulated limits or that manufacturers aren't dumping cadmium into nearby rivers or that worksites aren't making employees work on telephone poles without safety gear: You have an organization that reads all the relevant research, develops tests, runs those tests, and is empowered to Apply Consequences To violators. You don't trust some anonymous "bureaucrats", you trust a dedicated organization of subject matter experts and specialist inspectors that know how things are supposed to work and understand all the dodgy tricks that people are going to pull. This is how we went from The Jungle and Silent Spring and the hole in the ozone layer to where we are today. This approach works.