Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ESG should be boiled down to one simple measure: emissions

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 189 posts

Re: ESG should be boiled down to one simple measure: emissions

#111

Post by WalterBright »

tracker1 wrote: post #96

Pay-walled, so only got the summary... but even "emissions" isn't a simple calculation... do you include the electricity generation you get your power from? What about emissions on what went into something you buy? The mining, processing, shipping, refining, manufacturing and distribution of the final product, and many component hierarchies in play? Depending on how you look at something, getting an electric car is a…

> but even "emissions" isn't a simple calculation

Yes, it is. Tax the fuel on its carbon content at the point of sale of the fuel from the refinery.

Re: ESG should be boiled down to one simple measure: emissions

#112

Post by WalterBright »

clairity wrote: post #11

also note that CSR (corporate social responsibility) is public relations, not a moral or ethical position, part and parcel to the term 'greenwashing'. in the same vein as the article, we should stop talking about climate change in favor of pollution. climate change is vague, pollution is not. we can see and feel the effects of pollution, which makes it more likely that we can create a coalition to address it rather t…

The easiest way to get rid of coal plants is to tax the carbon content of fuel. Natural gas has twice the energy per C atom, so this would naturally(!) favor gas power generation over coal power.

Tax it, and let the market sort it out.

Re: ESG should be boiled down to one simple measure: emissions

#114

Post by JacobThreeThree »

WalterBright wrote: post #111
tracker1 wrote: post #96

Pay-walled, so only got the summary... but even "emissions" isn't a simple calculation... do you include the electricity generation you get your power from? What about emissions on what went into something you buy? The mining, processing, shipping, refining, manufacturing and distribution of the final product, and many component hierarchies in play? Depending on how you look at something, getting an electric car is a…

> but even "emissions" isn't a simple calculation Yes, it is. Tax the fuel on its carbon content at the point of sale of the fuel from the refinery.

Many activities generate emissions that have nothing to do with the sale of fuel.

Who gets to decide what counts as emissions?

Re: ESG should be boiled down to one simple measure: emissions

#115

Post by cardanome »

YarickR2 wrote: post #110
cardanome wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Transitioning from car-centric to human-centric cities is not about sacrifice. It is about understanding how cars actually keep cities from being places that could be much more enjoyable to live in. Having finding trouble an apartment? Without all the wasted space for cars we could have much denser cities. Problem solved! Want to have a place where children can actually play outside safely? Again, ban cars and you do…

OMG . Not personal, but you're delusional and/or straight up lying. Denser cities are more enjoyable to live ? Wrong. Denser cities safer for children to play outside ? Wrong. Cities are loud because of cars ? With all that increased density you will have your surroundings much noisier when it hurts most - at the end of the day, when everyone is back from the job, and having a good time at home. Loud music, celebrati…

I don't get why I am getting such emotional responses.

Most of the noise in cities comes from cars, that is a fact. Even dense cities can be fairly quiet. I suggest watching this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTV-wwszGw8

Plus China has probably not the best building codes, the problem can be further improved by having proper sound isolation in homes.

Dense cities mean you will have everything in walking distance. There will be much more space for parks and other areas of recreation.

Re: ESG should be boiled down to one simple measure: emissions

#116

Post by cardanome »

bluescrn wrote: post #109
cardanome wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Transitioning from car-centric to human-centric cities is not about sacrifice. It is about understanding how cars actually keep cities from being places that could be much more enjoyable to live in. Having finding trouble an apartment? Without all the wasted space for cars we could have much denser cities. Problem solved! Want to have a place where children can actually play outside safely? Again, ban cars and you do…

'Take away cars and meat from the poors and forcibly relocate them into tiny pods in Mega-City One' Don't you see any problems with that plan?

I have never owned a car in my life. Am I living in 1984?

It is really not a big deal.

Re: ESG should be boiled down to one simple measure: emissions

#117

Post by tbrownaw »

WalterBright wrote: post #111
tracker1 wrote: post #96

Pay-walled, so only got the summary... but even "emissions" isn't a simple calculation... do you include the electricity generation you get your power from? What about emissions on what went into something you buy? The mining, processing, shipping, refining, manufacturing and distribution of the final product, and many component hierarchies in play? Depending on how you look at something, getting an electric car is a…

> but even "emissions" isn't a simple calculation Yes, it is. Tax the fuel on its carbon content at the point of sale of the fuel from the refinery.

That forgets to count methane from cows.

Re: ESG should be boiled down to one simple measure: emissions

#118

Post by WalterBright »

tbrownaw wrote: post #117
WalterBright wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but even "emissions" isn't a simple calculation Yes, it is. Tax the fuel on its carbon content at the point of sale of the fuel from the refinery.

That forgets to count methane from cows.

Taxing beef isn't hard, either.

Re: ESG should be boiled down to one simple measure: emissions

#119

Post by WalterBright »

JacobThreeThree wrote: post #114
WalterBright wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but even "emissions" isn't a simple calculation Yes, it is. Tax the fuel on its carbon content at the point of sale of the fuel from the refinery.

Many activities generate emissions that have nothing to do with the sale of fuel. Who gets to decide what counts as emissions?

What percentage of it is is fuel based? 95%?

Re: ESG should be boiled down to one simple measure: emissions

#120

Post by teamonkey »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #67
sjaak wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shell: AA https://www.msci.com/our-solutions/esg-investing/esg-ratings... Higher than TSLA

Shell have committed to being net zero by 2050, including the products they sell and have some kind of a plan in place to make it happen. There's bits of their plan that seem dubious to me, like mentions of carbon capture but overall, since I believe that the problem of climate change wasn't "oh no, we can't do this, because it's impossible" but rather "we're not going to do this", that commitment and plan is all I'm…

> Shell have committed to being net zero by 2050, including the products they sell

How is this remotely possible in any real sense? It doesn’t hold up to any form of scrutiny. They would literally have to remove thousands of tonnes of carbon from the air every year and put it back in the ground. That is not possible.

No, they’ve built a few wind farms and intend to trade carbon credits. Pure greenwashing.

Post reply on HN