Gobal warming can be reduced if we act now.

[watervole]

The key is carbon pricing.  If we make carvon emissions expensive, then the move to low-carbon technology will follow.

I'm not concerned about news items about loss of grants for solar panels - that was a silly idea from the start.  One of those ideas with very little effectiveness (the CO2 cost of making the panels is high and they are too expensive to pay for themselves in sensible periods of time) that has been adopted because it looks glamorous - solar powered hot water heating would be far more sensible thing to subsidise, but it isn't as new and shiny.

Carbon pricing will let the market find the cost-effective options for itself.  However, the price must be set high enough to have an impact.

"The greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, whose emissions growth is causing the atmosphere to warm, can be brought under control, said the economists of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) - but only if governments act decisively.

Existing and emergent technologies, ranging from renewable energy and nuclear power to carbon capture and storage, will be adequate to make the reductions in emissions essential if the world is to avoid catastrophic rises in global temperature, they asserted in a new study. And this can be done at comparatively low cost - provided the right incentives are put in place.

The key incentive, they stressed, is a mechanism no one had heard of 20 years ago - the price of carbon, as determined by markets such as that of the European Union's Emissions Trading Scheme. If it is high enough, moving to a low-carbon economy will be a cost-effective measure around the world, and thus likely to happen much faster."

Read more

I could also be convinced by a carbon ration for every person on the planet, but I don't see the rich being willing to give the poor an equal ration per head.

Comments

[temeres.livejournal.com]

I liked the idea that was being touted a few months back, for giving everyone a smart card to register their carbon usage for driving and flying. As a non-flying non-driver I would remain well in credit, and could then either flog my carbon to some greedy gas-guzzler or sit on it (probably the latter).

Haven't heard any more of the scheme, though. I suspect someone worked out that limiting the freedom to fly out of the UK would simply lead to a boom in trade at Orly.

[purpletigron.livejournal.com]

It will either turn into carbon money, or an ID card scheme. Carbon money isn't such a bad idea - after all, even in WWII there was a thriving black market.

I still think we should uphold the ideal of every individual having the same carbon ration, though - as in, Contract and Converge (or, for that matter, Shrink and Share).

[watervole.livejournal.com]

A carbon card is an idea that I would very much like. Mind you, if we had to use it for everything as well as travel, I thing people would get some very nasty shocks. Being a vegetarian, you might well come out ahead, but many people would run out totally before the year was far gone.

Any scheme that would stand a chance would need to be applied across the EEC to avoid the kind of problems you mention.

[temeres.livejournal.com]

Being a vegetarian, you might well come out ahead

Hah! So you admit that there are green brownie points (greenie points?) to be had from being veggie? You have seen the light, but will you walk towards it?

[watervole.livejournal.com]

I've been semi-veggie for years. I probably only eat meat about once a week now.

The world is going to have to change a lot of its eating habits if we're serious about cutting CO2. The food sector is a very bit emitter and meat is far more costly in carbon terms.

[(Anonymous)]

(the CO2 cost of making the panels is high and they are too expensive to pay for themselves in sensible periods of time)

Yeah, but isn't that because they are a fairly new technology? With more investment and research, chances are we can get the costs (both in money and CO2) down.

[melodyclark.livejournal.com]

As with all technology, solar technology has improved by leaps and bounds over the last five or so years. It seems to me a slow-growth approach is best, as one might have in a business. Some carbon expenditure now may well result in a great yield when solar is perfected. I do feel dramatic steps have been made toward that end.

Gore's plan also suggests emissions caps and taxes in the States (instead of an income tax).

[watervole.livejournal.com]

If only Gore was president! I'd happily abolish income tax tomorrow and replace with a carbon tax.

I think lots of research is needed into solar, but I feel that if governments are going to subsidise stuff in the home to reduce carbon emissions, then they really should subsidise the stuff that is most cost-effective. Free loft insulation would reduce far more carbon for the same cost as subsidising solar panels.

[melodyclark.livejournal.com]

He would have been President if he'd been allowed to serve, but Junta Bush took over in their bloodless coup. I do think we have a good chance of Gore running (and winning) in '08.

It'll be interesting to see Blair's successor and how he will work with things.

[the-mendicant.livejournal.com]

I prefer the regime in the Kingdom of Bhutan, which is 100% green focussed and societal progress isn't measured by GNP but by GNH (Gross National Happiness) - no I'm not kidding you! The King has decreed that by looking after the environment he people will ultimately feel happier about their position in the world and life in general.

[melodyclark.livejournal.com]

Well, Bhutan is about half the size of one of our mid-sized states over here in the States so perhaps he'll have some hope of reaching that aim. Good luck to him. In a governmental body the size of Europe or the US, it's a far more complex matter.