Mmm. Carbon

[Drjones]

COPENHAGEN (MarketWatch) -- The value of the global carbon trading market could rise from roughly $118 billion in 2008 to nearly $2 trillion by 2020, although it currently remains frozen in the headlights pending safe passage of U.S. emissions trading legislation.

Wonder if my company's 401k plan will offer a mutual fund option.

[akmnstr]

COPENHAGEN (MarketWatch) -- The value of the global carbon trading market could rise from roughly $118 billion in 2008 to nearly $2 trillion by 2020, although it currently remains frozen in the headlights pending safe passage of U.S. emissions trading legislation.

Wonder if my company's 401k plan will offer a mutual fund option.

Food for thought.  Why not save all that CO2 we exhale and then sell it in 2020 when the market hits 2 trillion.  Should be able to afford some ocean beach front property in AZ with your profits. 

[yotogi]

Food for thought.  Why not save all that CO2 we exhale and then sell it in 2020 when the market hits 2 trillion.  Should be able to afford some ocean beach front property in AZ with your profits. 

I know that you are making a joke here, but the remember that you will not be selling your CO2, you will be selling holding your breath. Carbon offsets are the sale of carbon reduction (planting trees and the like) to offset extra production of carbon (power plants, industrial development...) above the current restrictions. It is a stepping stone that we can use to get to reduced emissions from things like coal power while we figure out a long-term solution to increasing levels of CO2.

Screw investing in carbon offsets, invest in companies doing real work in the area of carbon sequestering.

[Popeye the Sailor]

I know that you are making a joke here, but the remember that you will not be selling your CO2, you will be selling holding your breath.

That works. There's a lot of people I'd pay to hold their breath for a few years.

[roy-nexus-6]

Screw investing in carbon offsets, invest in companies doing real work in the area of carbon sequestering.

mmmmm, depends how you want to sequester things.

I'm not keen on trying to pump it into the ground - a costly mechanical process, and its debatable if this is a valid long term solution.

I'm a molecular microbiologist, so I am rather keen on biological sequestration methods. 

[Mad Duc]

The biggest issue I see is that there's not real way to tell how it is working. Producers have a reason to understate their production and the reducers have a reason to lie about how much they can reduce. The system in Europe has been shown to be rather poor if effective at all.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124587942001349765.html

I'm for reducing carbon emissions but I want a system that actually works, not just one that makes money for the middlemen.  It would be more effective for direct subsidies to companies that create carbon reducing systems than to implement cap & trade style policies.

[yotogi]

I'm a molecular microbiologist, so I am rather keen on biological sequestration methods. 

Cannot do anything but agree with you there.

I'm for reducing carbon emissions but I want a system that actually works, not just one that makes money for the middlemen.  It would be more effective for direct subsidies to companies that create carbon reducing systems than to implement cap & trade style policies.

I agree on the point of creating a system that actually works. I hope that my original post didn't read as some kind of "hey I heard about this on the cable news so it must be true" kind of statements.

[akmnstr]

I know that you are making a joke here

Yes, I was and a rather silly one.  

I also think the buying and selling carbon credits is silly.  I'd rather see tax breaks for those that reduce carbon emissions and a tax on those that produce.  

[angler]

I consult in this area.  Trading works, but only if your good, in this case carbon credits, is well defined.  Therein currently lies the rub. There are lots of certifiers out there ranging from really good to not quite so good.  Other markets like this are headed down the pipe or are already here like green energy credits and nutrient credits (think farm/lawn/city runnoff).  Cap and trade has worked wonders for SO2 and other coal nasties.  This will work, too, if designed well and will allow business to optimize their pollution stream.  Let's face it, there will never be no pollution but would you rather have big gov't tell businesses what to do or would you rather allow businesses to make decisions consistent with reducing pollution in a way that is efficient.

[roy-nexus-6]

Cap and trade has worked wonders for SO2 and other coal nasties.  This will work, too, if designed well and will allow business to optimize their pollution stream.  Let's face it, there will never be no pollution but would you rather have big gov't tell businesses what to do or would you rather allow businesses to make decisions consistent with reducing pollution in a way that is efficient.

These two points are critical.
To them I would perhaps add the suggestion that it is not necessarily a bad thing if the government throws it's hat in the ring from time to time.
For example, all inner city highway construction is tendered out to companies who generally anti up 1 billion - and earn ten times or more than this over the following 2 decades. I am at a loss as to why taxpayer money isnt used to build the highways... then (cheaper than normal) tolls are collected: the debt is repaid, and additional funds are used for other projects.

[yotogi]

These two points are critical.
To them I would perhaps add the suggestion that it is not necessarily a bad thing if the government throws it's hat in the ring from time to time.
For example, all inner city highway construction is tendered out to companies who generally anti up 1 billion - and earn ten times or more than this over the following 2 decades. I am at a loss as to why taxpayer money isnt used to build the highways... then (cheaper than normal) tolls are collected: the debt is repaid, and additional funds are used for other projects.

Yeah, it is always tough to balance when it is good or bad for the government to get involved at all. Toll roads are a messy item to consider as it feels that they are money grabs by the companies and really crappy management by the city/county/state. If we want to discuss carbon offsets/cap and trade, I think that this would be a good place to do so. To get in the arena of how much government should be involved in projects like highway construction, I think that it will derail and head into the realm of governments role in modern capitalism.

And the EPA finally weighs in:
http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/bd4379a92ceceeac8525735900400c27/08d11a451131bca585257685005bf252!OpenDocument

I like how this conversation, thus-far, has focused on how to make a system work as opposed to the debate as to if we need a system to control CO2 levels at all.

[ducpainter]

That works. There's a lot of people I'd pay to hold their breath for a few years.

You lookin' in the mirror?

[Rev. Millertime]

That works. There's a lot of people I'd pay to hold their breath for a few years.

Yeah, and they are all headed to Copenhagen!

[akmnstr]

I guess I'm cynical and I don't expect corporations to act in the best interest of either the public or the environment.  Protection of the environment and the public interest has been the roll of the government since the issues of a degrading environment were raised.  Will a corporation be motivated to move towards a sustainable carbon free energy source when it can trade for credits?  Carbon based fuels are still cheaper than the alternatives and I don't see where the motivation to change when the bottom line is the bottom line.  Having said my piece I realize that credits are what the world has chosen and I hope that it works and it is enough.

[mitt]

Yeah, and they are all headed to Copenhagen!

On green jets 

mitt