Indonesia reports reduced deforestation, triggering carbon payment from Norway • Hacker News Board

Re: Indonesia reports reduced deforestation, triggering carbon payment from Norway

#121

Post by zcid » Thu, Feb 21, 2019, 3:51 PM UTC

est31 wrote: post #12

XorNot wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's less beef, specifically. On a practical level cutting out meat entirely can actually increase emissions because you can raise farm animals off of human inedible parts of plants like stems and other marginal food (i.e. parts we don't get any nutrition from). Beef however is one of the worst conversion methods in this regard, but animals like chickens and goats are quite efficient.

Insects are most efficient btw, but there are cultural reservations about them in the west.

I looked into raising crickets, but most of my research suggested that they aren't any more efficient than chickens. It seems that a lot of the studies we currently have are poorly done or not transferable to mass production.

In addition, the amount of extra work for processing crickets made the project less than optimal at least for a small operation.

Re: Indonesia reports reduced deforestation, triggering carbon payment from Norway

#122

Post by skosch » Thu, Feb 21, 2019, 3:55 PM UTC

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #58

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Institute a carbon tax and it'll vanish into someone's pocket while the manufactured goods still have the same emissions.

Use some of it to subsidise insulation and better standard buildings, cleaner air and power, better railways etc. Fund a UBI. I'm fascinated at downvotes for this suggestion. What's actually wrong with spending part on lower impact infrastructure and part on a replacement for a broken welfare system?

Your heart is in the right place, but what you advocate isn't currently palatable to anyone, left or right, on the political spectrum.

Instead, push for a fee-and-dividend model – not entirely UBI, but similar in spirit. It's what most economists support, and it has enough bipartisan support [0] that there is actually a bill before Congress now that has a chance of passing.

[0] https://citizensclimatelobby.org/climate-solutions-caucus/

Re: Indonesia reports reduced deforestation, triggering carbon payment from Norway

#123

Post by sideshowb » Thu, Feb 21, 2019, 3:57 PM UTC

wjnc wrote: post #87

andrepd wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People do get that, but waiting for people to spontaneously start doing the right thing is just not a very good strategy. That's why we need a carbon tax. To force people to.

As an economist I fully agree. It's not the solution but the measure that helps consumers in ranking all possible solutions. Why is flying without kerosine tax? Why do we spend a few k€ on electric car subsidies per MT less emitted. A tax would make things like this transparant. All we need is some party with the clout of the EU or US to get this thing going. There is no opting out trading with us and no opting out f…

> CO2 accounting and taxing will be a massive invitation for corruption, gaming and bad actors

That's the problem already. We've had a CO2 price for a long time - but it's meaninglessly low. I can only presume because of lobbying from those with vested interests.

Re: Indonesia reports reduced deforestation, triggering carbon payment from Norway

#124

Post by gimmeThaBeet » Thu, Feb 21, 2019, 4:06 PM UTC

gph wrote: post #103

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They also killed off most of the forests. Yeah, keep this in mind; big parts of Europe are hundreds of years after a gradual deforestation. Europe, mostly Western, is highly cultivated. Mind you, thanks to that we're also very efficient in agriculture - NL, despite being one of the smallest countries in the world, is also the second biggest agricultural export country in the world.

>NL, despite being one of the smallest countries in the world, is also the second biggest agricultural export country in the world. That stat while true is very misleading. First of all that's based on money not volume. On top of that the majority of NL's agricultural export is due to the fact that Amsterdam is home to the largest flower/live plant market/exchange in the world. Most of those billions of dollars of ex…

That combination doesn't make a lot of sense. The CBS shows that ornamental horticulture has a plurality, but even if you strip away all the prepared products, and most of the fruits (first imported), and then cut that number in half, it's more than the flowers/nursery products, assuming they're all domestic.

https://www.cbs.nl/en-gb/news/2019/03/agricultural-export-va...

Re: Indonesia reports reduced deforestation, triggering carbon payment from Norway

#125

Post by sigfubar » Thu, Feb 21, 2019, 4:08 PM UTC

maaaats wrote: post #2

> In 2010, Norway pledged to support Indonesia with up to 1 billion USD depending on results. It's easy to sit in a developed western country, buying products from other countries, and then complain about their emissions. I'm glad that we're trying to be responsible. It may not be enough or not the right way to do it (some thoughts on this?), but it's something.

How developed can the US be considering that we have destroyed our manufacturing base and cannot even provide clean water and healthcare for our own citizens?

Re: Indonesia reports reduced deforestation, triggering carbon payment from Norway

#126

Post by pastor_elm » Thu, Feb 21, 2019, 4:08 PM UTC

duopixel wrote: post #16

When I first moved to Europe I was struck by just how domesticated the land is. I can sleep in the open without being afraid of snakes, scorpions, spiders, wolves or bears. Even when land is "wild", the larger mammals will be rabbits, deer, wild goats and such. Excepting natural parks, hunters are the only predators. At least in Spain, a tremendous percentage of land is put at the service of mankind. The dehesas give…

Japan has 67% Forest cover. South Korea 63%. Indonesia...46%.

Clearing your land for agriculture only benefits a select few. It is not a good way to grow into a first world economy.

Bringing up what Europeans did 1000-500 years ago is not a good analogy.

Re: Indonesia reports reduced deforestation, triggering carbon payment from Norway

#127

Post by everdev » Thu, Feb 21, 2019, 4:19 PM UTC

ptaffs wrote: post #116

everdev wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And, people don't usually put themselves at an economic disadvantage. If their neighbors are buying cheap goods, they probably will too.

I disagree, with advertising and brand loyalty, often people spend more than they need to on equivalent goods.

Sure, if it's a marginal cost increase or if you're wealthy.

But middle-income families typically aren't going to spend 25-50% more on a comparable product to save on CO2.

There was a big push decades ago to buy American, but it largely failed because for the majority of people living paycheck to paycheck, spending 25-50% more to have an American flag sticker on your purchase wasn't worth it.

Re: Indonesia reports reduced deforestation, triggering carbon payment from Norway

#128

Post by kakarot » Thu, Feb 21, 2019, 4:28 PM UTC

bilbo0s wrote: post #115

kakarot wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If our neoliberal globalist government didn't effectively force us to outsource the production of the products we consume with unrestricted labor markets and generally stagnant wages in the face of explosive inflation, maybe we would have that luxury. Poor people have been put in a position where they really don't have a lot of options. Blaming poor Westerners is like blaming a child for their parent's bad spending h…

> Blaming Westerners is like blaming a child for their parent's bad spending habits... I'd amend that a bit and say, "Blaming [ poor ] Westerners is like blaming a child for their parent's bad spending habits...". Wealthy westerners and their policy decisions, as you rightly point out, are largely responsible for the current state of affairs vis-à-vis the economy.

I agree. Edited :)

Re: Indonesia reports reduced deforestation, triggering carbon payment from Norway

#129

Post by npongratz » Thu, Feb 21, 2019, 4:40 PM UTC

skosch wrote: post #119

kodablah wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Always another regressive tax needed as the only way to solve a problem. There are other options that don't so egregiously favor the ones with money.

You make it revenue neutral – look up fee and dividend, the method favoured by most economists. The bottom ~2/3rd of households would, on average, get more money back than the tax would cost them.

> The bottom ~2/3rd of households would, on average, get more money back than the tax would cost them.

Please correct me if I'm misunderstanding: 2/3rds of households would first have to pay up, and then they'll get more money back than they paid in? If that's true, it sounds like it would be instituting needless added complexity, with a layer added for politicians and bureaucrats to take a cut before giving it back.

Re: Indonesia reports reduced deforestation, triggering carbon payment from Norway

#130

Post by amvalo » Thu, Feb 21, 2019, 4:46 PM UTC

peanutz454 wrote: post #44

fghtr wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reference: http://www.kimnicholas.com/uploads/2/5/7/6/25766487/fig1full...

I find this difficult to believe! One transatlantic round trip flight is about 60% as bad as living car free? Assuming you do not travel at all - right? But you will travel. You will cycle to work, and you will burn more calories, and you will therefore eat more food, ending up contributing just as much too increasing emissions!

It's true! Rule of thumb (which may surprise people) is that cars, boats and planes are all about the same for grams CO2 / passenger mile.

So if you commute 10 miles to work every day, they are similar.