11 ms·
Suppose many of those projects would not be built out without channeling significant capital to it, and carbon credits being an effective means of securing that
by kevindamm 2y ago
Suppose many of those projects would not be built out without channeling significant capital to it, and carbon credits being an effective means of securing that capital. Would that change the calculus for you?
Note that I recognize many (possibly most?) carbon credits programs are bogus or worse, but trying to draw attention to circumstances where it's not always so cut and dry.
- faeriechangling 2y agoI think the most cut and dry situations is which they capture concentrated emissions from something like an O&G refinery or a cement plant, since it's an effort which ONLY exists for the sake of reducing emissions. Even some of these, hilariously enough, despite how insanely quantifiable their benefits are, you see phenomenon like phantom credits like where Alberta, Canada gave Shell double credit for each tonne of Co2 they actually reduced. I'm sure subsidies for green energy projects do reduce emissions, I just think the accounting is BS.
- al_borland 2y agoI think for renewable energy to win it has to be financially viable on its own. If it requires carbon credits to get started, is it going to be viable without them?