Posted on 06/27/2022 7:00:21 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
The developed world has advanced mightily over 60 years, increasing its lifespan and per capita income. But such growth has been a double-edged sword: using cheap fossil fuels has enabled the good fortune, but it has also created an environmental hazard that could lead to irreversible damage.
Now is the time to address this inequity. Indeed, there’s been a cost to fossil fuel development that oil, gas, and coal companies have not borne. In other words, CO2 and other greenhouse gases have not generally been taxed — a cost that the greater society has picked up. Enter carbon credits, which are part of the solution, but they must be reasonably priced.
The price has to increase for the carbon offset market to function correctly. An oversupply of voluntary credits may limit price increases, but they will attract more players, says BloombergNEF. Conversely, it adds that verified sovereign credits will push prices to $120 a ton by 2050.
Corporate behavior would thus change, leading to decarbonization of the global economy— a painful transition that necessitates a social safety net. However, the price of inaction would be more significant, especially for low-lying nations hit by the effects of climate change.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
Carbon != Climate
even forbes has gone full leftard
And the 2 biggest culprits, India and China, pay nothing!
Communists are really good at solving imagined problems.
Is this an announcement that Obama is selling his waterfront estates?
Forbes is owned by China. Literally.
What the hell is this talking about?
Gotta make it more expensive because //equity word salad//
All about bringing America into the great reset and an equal to third world nations.
“...an environmental hazard that could lead to irreversible damage....” Uh, would the ministry of truth pick up the white courtesy phone please. Or, since ‘they’ used “could”, these assclowns would get a pass? Butt, we know what the intentions are. 😵💫🤡🤬
Carbon dioxide is not a dangerous pollutant.
We could solve this problem overnight if everyone who believes it is would personally stop emitting it.
A plastic bag over your head would ensure you do not add carbon dioxide.
This is all about Population Control and destroying a Free and Productive society.
The generation of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by the burning of hydrocarbon fuels (NOT “fossil fuels”) by all the activities of mankind is negligible, and quickly taken up by growing green plants, grass, trees, potatoes, weeds, or whatever. More than that, carbon dioxide has NO significant effect on the warming or cooling of climate, short or long term. The only effective “greenhouse gas” is water vapor.
Compare how much CO2 and H2O are created with the burning of one molecule of hydrocarbon fuel. Then tell me how water vapor shall ever be regulated.
Forbes is now owned by some Chinese company. There couldn’t be any influence on editorial slant, could there?
I’m asking as a long-time Forbes mag subscriber.
[[The developed world has advanced mightily over 60 years, increasing its per capita income]]
And now it’s time to take themi creased wages and yearly incomes away fro the poor saps who earn it legitimately by enacting fines taxes and regulations which drain each person of their Income
[[Communists are really good at solving imagined problems.]]
Yup and they do so by stripping peoples rights from them in order to fix the imaginary problems
Forbes is majority owned by communist China. Might as well read the Peking gazette.
Expected rhetoric from a wealthy psychopath.
[[The generation of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by the burning of hydrocarbon fuels (NOT “fossil fuels”) by all the activities of mankind is negligible, ]]
Roughly 0.00136% of the atmosphere (Note, thismis strictly co2 by man, not all greenhouse gases, which amounts approx .04% of atmosphere)
Man’s co2 in no way shape or form can possibly be responsible for warming. There just is nowhere near enough to blanket the earth in a thick enough blanket to stop heat from escaping.
Take a piece of legal document paper, and place a bb on it. That is how little our co2 takes up
Or to be more precise, put 4 5 gallon pails of water in an Olympic sized pool. That is 0.0136% of the pool. (Someone was kind enough to figure that out for me)
If we put 4 five gallon pails of 100 degree water into a pool that size, of water that is 90 degrees, does it cause “catastrophic warming”? Nope- doesn’t raise the pool temp,one bit, because there is nowhere near enough 100 degree water. The 100 degree water quickly reaches equilibrium because it is overwhelmed by the volume,of colder 90 degree water.
Same thing with pur planeT. Nowhere near enough co2 to cause warming.
Right? It’s such a simple solution. It’s the ultimate virtual signal.
If only we knew what makes plants grow…
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.