One tonne challenge

[The Terrible Sweal]

You may have seen Rick Mercer babbling about the one tonne challenge on TV. The guvmint is challenging citizens to each reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by one tonne to help acheive out objectives under the Kyotocol.

Well wait a second ... Kyoto establishes a system of exchange for pollution 'credits' wherein those who don't pollute much can sell their 'right to pollute' to those who do pollute.

So ... there is something missing with the one tonne challenge, if I reduce by a tonne do I get paid for it? If not, who's absconding with my pollution credit in this system?

Methinks I smell a moneygrab.

[kimmy]

So ... there is something missing with the one tonne challenge, if I reduce by a tonne do I get paid for it? If not, who's absconding with my pollution credit in this system?

Perhaps it's Rick Mercer, who I imagine doesn't work cheap.

I haven't heard much about these pollution credits, but I'm concerned that I won't be getting a fair share. I sold my fearsome Plymouth Reliant a couple of years ago, and rely on bicycle and bus for transportation. How am I to get my credits? Should I have hung onto the Reliant until I have an opportunity to earn some pollution credits for disposing of it?

This pollution-credits idea... is it an opportunity for rich-people to get tax-breaks by switching their yacht to wind-power, turning down the thermostat of the west-wing of the mansion a couple of degrees, and trading in the SUV for a more fuel-efficient Porsche?

I just don't have an SUV, a west-wing, or a yacht. Where am I going to get my credits?

-kimmy

[PocketRocket]

Unless I'm mistaken, KIMMY, the credits are not available to you or I. These credits are given to countries with low emmissions, who can then choose to trade/sell them with other nations who are not doing so well reducing emmissions.

In other words, a 3rd-world country with little or no industrialization, and therefore little air pollution, could really clean up. Pardon the pun.

[August1991]

Unless I'm mistaken, KIMMY, the credits are not available to you or I.

Damn, I guess this means I'll have to take that ebay posting down.

These credits are given to countries with low emmissions, who can then choose to trade/sell them with other nations who are not doing so well reducing emmissions.

How was "low emission" defined for any given country? Low with respect to what?

This the crux of the problem with Kyoto.

We're going to play a game called "Store the Junk".

Sam has accumulated junk all his life. Bob has never cared for material possessions and has accumulated none.

We'll give Sam the one bedroom apartment to store his stuff and we'll give Bob the farmhouse and barn. Why? Because Sam has money and will have to pay Bob to rent the space we arbitrarily gave him.

Should anyone be surprised if Sam refuses to play this game?

[Guest eureka]

In a way, August, you are close to the concept with Sam and Bob. Not close enough, though.

The credit trading reflects more the capacity of one country, or entity, to sequester CO2. It can favour those with the appropriate forestry biospheres and other carbon sinks.

Don't ask me to explain that further. Scientific discussions give me major headaches

[Jetta]

I think that Mercer's commercial is just a way for the granola eaters and those obsessed with limiting their waste by believing they can and must do something when in reality, the pollution created by everyday folks is a drop in the bucket on the national scale of factories and such. Let the public believe that the burden is on them so they don't try to lobby the government to make a true effort to control emissions...