Sentences with phrase «carbon trading credits»

Maybe you should just take $ 1 billion in carbon trading credits and go drink white wine with Al Gore.

Not exact matches

(That's difficult in any system that involves buying and selling carbon credits, including cap - and - trade.)

Another issue loaded with political implications is the proposed carbon - credit trading mechanism, by which countries with less «pollution» than their set limits can sell credits to those that exceed their quotas.

The report accepts minister's efforts to include aviation in the EU emissions trading scheme, where firms would be given a certain allocation of carbon credits to buy and sell on the open market, but warns this is still «years away».

In contrast, in Europe, which initiated trading of carbon credits on January 1 to meet its Kyoto commitments, credits already sell for about $ 11 to $ 12 per ton.

Since the Kyoto protocol came into force in 2005, companies in the developing world can generate greenhouse gas emission reductions and sell them as «carbon credits» in the developed world through such mechanisms as the European Union's Environmental Trading Scheme (EU ETS), which is similar to schemes in Japan and New Zealand.

It also lays out guidelines for carbon trading, which lets power generators buy allowances or credits from cleaner electricity sources to meet required CO2 levels.

It isn't officially announced whether nonpolluters can trade allowances on the Chinese carbon market, but they will certainly be allowed to take part as offset credit suppliers.

Tao says that his team cooperates with carbon trading experts to credit the emissions data and hopes to sell the credits to whoever needs them to offset his carbon footprint.

Luyssaert suggests that credit — and money — should be given to protect such old - growth forests under carbon trading schemes and other economic mechanisms to combat climate change.

Like Obama, he supports a cap - and - trade system — but in his version, the government gives carbon credits free of charge to companies who continue to pollute.

This is a key factor in carbon offset schemes, in which trees are given a cash value according to their carbon content, and credits can be traded in exchange for preserving trees.

The CDM awards successfully registered projects Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), credits that can be sold to governments or into the European Union's carbon cap - and - trade program.

The trading of any commodity — whether wheat, pork bellies or renewable energy credits — is essentially the same, but it helps to have an understanding of the reality behind the abstract: the color - coded blinking numbers on a broker's multiple computer screens that reflect current prices in a spread of different regional carbon markets, like the European Carbon Exchange.

Besides trading carbon allowances among each other, companies included in Shenzhen and other Chinese carbon markets are also able to use offset credits generated by carbon - cutting projects to cover 5 to 10 percent of their emissions as a way of lowering emissions reduction costs.

CERs are the most heavily traded carbon offset credit in the world, used mostly by European companies to keep their greenhouse gas emissions levels beneath a government - mandated cap.

Member states will allocate emissions credits, much like was done in the European Union's carbon trading program, and trade between one another.

It is unclear whether the upcoming Chinese carbon trading market, starting from next year, will allow companies to trade emission credits generated from CCUS projects.

At the moment, these carbon markets only trade in credits for terrestrial ecosystems; for example, keeping a certain amount of forest intact in order to offset a ton of carbon dioxide emitted by burning fossil fuels.

Under a carbon trading system, credits could be handed out to nations allowing them to emit, at the start, one tonne of carbon per head of their population.

EU officials have confirmed they will move to address controversial carbon credits that «game» the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and undermine the effectiveness of the EU emissions trading scheme (ETS)...

The objective is for the CGYs to be recognized as equivalent to the carbon offsets now traded under the European Trading System (ETS), EU Member States and companies operating under the EU ETS would purchase and trade the CGY credits as they do other GHG allowance credits.

The index currently includes two carbon - related credit plans: European Union Emission Trading Scheme or EU ETS Phase II and Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism.

Australians have been able to trade in carbon credits for a few years.

Carbon trading can also involve households, small businesses and farmers participating in carbon credit projects that are set up to generate carbon credits and compete in tenders to sell them to the Commonwealth Government's Emissions Reduction Fund.

This has exposed everyday citizens to a diverse range of financial products and derivatives, from trading forex and currencies to exchanging carbon credits.

The new agreement will likely lead to a future set of limits allowing Kyoto parties to keep on capping greenhouse - gas emissions and trading carbon credits.

There is also an incredibly rich conversation going on right now in China on what market - based measures they might want to use — carbon tax, cap and trade, sectoral crediting.

All of which illustrates both the futility of making economic predictions and the futility of the philosophy behind carbon taxes, credits and trading.

It needs to be spelled out, because the «solutions» that are acceptable to the business world (carbon credit trading and attempts at burying CO2 emissions) will have almost zero effect on the real world — the rate of increase of CO2 in the atmosphere will be unaffected by such «solutions».

They argued that the trading system provides far too much leeway for dealing in «offsets,» credits earned by avoiding or preventing emissions of carbon dioxide.

At any rate, in my personal view, we should not prescribe exactly what needs to be done but should instead implement flexible schemes like Kyoto or the McCain - Lieberman Climate Stewardship Act that allow trading of emissions credits, credits for carbon sequestration (provided it can truly be shown to work) and so on.

In a «joint policy statement» published in the journal Science last month, a group of researchers from around the world said trade in carbon credits earned this way was premature «unless research provides the scientific foundation to evaluate risks and benefits.»

There, James Kanter has a fresh post on developments related to the growing trade in carbon offsets, credits a person or company can buy from someone planting trees or building windmills or the like, which — in theory at least — could compensate for unavoidable emissions of carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases.

More importantly, the Climate Security Act of 2007 (Lieberman / Warner bill) is currently in mark - up and exempts co-ops from the cap - and - trade decreasing carbon allocations by setting their emissions at 2006 levels until 2035 and then allowing them to sell or trade their emission credits.

Gates hammered on points reported here for many years: that without a big, and sustained, boost in spending on basic research and development on energy frontiers, the chances of triggering an energy revolution are nil; that while the private sector and venture capital investors are vital for transforming breakthroughs into marketable products or services, they will not invest in the long - haul inquiry that's required to generate game - changing breakthroughs; that a 1 or 2 percent tax on carbon - emitting fuels could generate a large, steady stream of money for invigorating the innovation pipeline; that a declining emissions cap and credit trading system --- if it could survive America's polarized politics --- would have to raise energy costs far beyond what would be politically tenable to generate a similar scale of transformational activity.

• A carbon tax, OR a robust carbon cap with a corresponding genuine (and regulated) marketplace for trading carbon credits.

Aside from the Peabody / Kansas question, do you support either a carbon tax or a robust carbon cap combined with a genuine carbon credit trading marketplace?

However, if some (or many) of these efforts have some smoke - and - mirror aspect to them, or if they become the seemingly easy «solution du jour» and allow us to think that we can avoid larger solutions (fuel efficiency standards; carbon tax, or firm carbon cap combined with a robust and regulated carbon credit trading mechanism; substantial investments in new energy technologies; energy conservation; etc.), their net impact can be more damaging than beneficial.

Credits are being sold on voluntary carbon - trading markets (for companies and individuals seeking to offset emissions contributing to global warming).

When I was at the zoo last week, I asked a lawyer from the conservation society whether it might be best to think of these credits as «conservation credits,» given the persistent questions about the utility of carbon trading in limiting the buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Unfortunately, there don't seem to be legions of lobbyists out there for innovation (and energy efficiency, for that matter), while there are potent forces fighting on the side of coal companies and utilities, financial institutions eager to trade carbon credits, manufacturers and retailers of today's consumer products.

With other approaches to an energy and climate bill blocked — including carbon taxes or a broader cap - and - trade mechanism for controlling emissions — the only viable alternative appears to be to limit a cap to utilities, the one sector that's already familiar with smokestack rules and markets in emissions credits.

TH: And you've actually testified as an expert in front of a Senate committee on climate change, and The Nature Conservancy is also pretty active in emissions trading, or carbon credit trading programs to tackle climate change issues.

In other words, Google's great initiative should not be seen as a reason to dodge the need for a carbon tax or a robust carbon cap combined with a genuine, credible, carbon credit trading market.

The atmosphere is not an infinite dump, so if a trading system for carbon dioxide credits — like the recent financial bubble — doesn't actually lead to progress, we'll know it.

I think people should ask any company (or company representative) that claims to be «green», or wants to sell a «green» product to them, whether that company firmly supports a carbon cap of some sort (along with a well - regulated carbon credit trading mechanism) or a carbon tax.

Rising Tide has had a lot of fun with entrepreneurs involved in trading credits earned by cutting greenhouse - gas emissions, recently sending «greenwash guerillas» to root out what it called «carbon traitors» at a conference on carbon trading.]

Do you support, and will you implement, a «carbon tax» OR a robust carbon cap combined with a regulated mechanism of carbon credit trading?

Do a google search using the words «methane arctic ozone» Make a new tab to google the words «methane nitrous oxides arctic ozone» Make another new tab and google «igor arctic torches» After another tab google «howarth fracking methane» This should keep you busy for quite a while before you realize that carbon credit trading schemes have nothing to do with what we are facing.