Paintings in museums have glass in front of them. They are not damaged by this. However it gets clicks and then people talk about the climate crisis.
MrMakabar
joined 1 year ago
And this goes back to the first post I made, about the difference between carbon markets and carbon offsets. The EU ETS does not have offsets and does not allow for emitters promising to emit less to be paid for doing so. There are a capped amount of carbon credits auctioned by a government body, which companies emitting within the EU and some other member countries have to buy to be permitted to emit. The amount of credits is lowered every year towards zero by 2050. The money paid goes to the government to be used to support green projects or be paid out to citizens. To put it another way:
- No private company benefits from selling any sort of carbon credits in that system
- Companies who purchase credits have to do so, due to emitting, so no pretending to not doing that
- It is raising in the long term depending on how much emissions decline, due to the cap being lowered
- a clear path towards zero emissions within the system(unlike a tax for example)
Sure there are differences for carbon tax the price is set and for a carbon market like EU ETS the emissions are fixed. However I fail to see how $24.15/t in Australia in 2014 is a better policy then EU ETS at €74.9/t right now, which is $122.78/t. That is all in Australian dollar. EU ETS also had a lot of problems, but by now most of them are fixed. With the additional ETS-2, which uses the same systems, but covers road transport and heating it should cover most EU emissions soonish too. Australias system is in scope fairly compareable to EU ETS-1.
Please explain to me, why EU ETS is a pittance, when it is clearly more money, then Australias carbon tax, which you praise. If I wanted to be fair and compare both systems the carbon markets looks much better, as it is still in place and the cost per t are higher.
No, the oil companies "lobby" for a carbon tax and similar schemes, because they believe they are not going to happen. Here is an EXXON lobbyist explaining it in a fake job interview with Greenpeace pretending to be a Middle Eastern oil company.
Imho we have to distinguish between carbon markets and allowing carbon offsets. The EU emission trading scheme for example just issues a number of certificates and forces certain emitters to purchase them in an open auction. So you put a variable price on carbon and create an incentive to reduce emissions due to regular reductions of the certificates offered. The money is then used to invest into green technology or handed out to the general public. This works thanks to not having carbon offsets.
Carbon offsets do not really work, as they are often just fake and if not mostly just take land from the poor to put it under conservation. Usually that is just removing people, who treat the land well anyway, so it has not benefit for nature, but hurts poor people.
This is a legal term and civil disobedience has never been punished like this by German authorities. It was mainly a fine and maybe a few days in prison and not years.
The idea of last generation is to bring up the climate crisis on a regular bases. They are actually extremely good at it. Seriously they got more articles written about them, then Fridays for Future got at their peak.
I honestly believe them turning on hitting the rich, rather then more average Germans is a smart move though. The general sympathy towards people flying private jets is rather limited.
The law is meant to be used against serious organized crime groups like the Mafia. It requires fairly serious crimes being planned and commited by the group to be used, which carry at least two years of prison for them. The problem with it, is that is that 'forming a criminal organisation' means 5 years of prision for any member and 3 years for a supporter.
This could mean that the German government locks up basically the entire German climate movement.
"The plan" implies the main intention was to harm people and not to make a lot of money and Atlas shrug their way out of resonsbility.
Those parties are in the current Spanish government. Also the issue of independence is talked about less. Hence this is possible.
I honestly do not believe that harming millions of poor people was the plan. It was mainly a know site effect, which was accepeted by the rich.
XR is widely hated, but it is extremely successful in making people talk about the climate crisis. Actions such as blocking oil refineries, coal power plants and so forth certainly work and cause massive damage to large emitters. The problem is that the media does not report on it, so when you want to recruit, you do so by blocking streets.
The simple truth is that you need both. Large scale mobilization and some more radical action. It is very clear that large scale protests have not worked as well as needed.