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

Indonesia reports reduced deforestation, triggering carbon payment from Norway

norway.no

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 234 posts

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

#211

Post by rebornshellfish »

porpoisely wrote: post #201
rebornshellfish wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You realise that Indonesia has 15x the population of the Netherlands, right? And that Norway is tiny, literally like 2% of the population of Indonesia? Maybe if Indonesia was more careful with birth control and didn't have babies that it can't afford, it wouldn't have such a problem with poverty. Having babies is not a debt on other people.

Indonesia might has 15X more people, but it's also geographically 50X bigger than the netherlands. The netherlands is far more overpopulated than indonesia. Also indonesia's poverty is a legacy of more than a century of dutch colonization and exploitation and its inability to develop due to other considerations. I think we are mostly agreed but you seem to have been misreading my comments. My point is let indonesia d…

You realise that Europeans invented economic development, right?

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

#212

Post by StreamBright »

reaperducer wrote: post #156
StreamBright wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly what most Westerners do not get about China. If you want to reduce emissions stop buying their products.

This is exactly what most Westerners do not get about China. If you want to reduce emissions stop buying their products. Help me find a consumer toaster made in the United States. I searched for six months and only found ones made in China. If I want a giant hotel toaster, there is an American option. But nothing sized for a household kitchen. There are lots of people who make efforts to buy domestically. But so much…

Supply and demand. There is no demand of US toasters at the moment. The US has moved almost every production facility to China to make stake holders happy. The question is was it worth it?

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

#213

Post by StreamBright »

DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #35
StreamBright wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly what most Westerners do not get about China. If you want to reduce emissions stop buying their products.

let me fix that for you: if you want to reduce emissions stop consuming

I can consume energy coming from clean sources like nuclear (focusing on the CO2) and renewable and I can also consume energy coming from coal power plants. Same thing with many other resources. I can order from Amazon a pen-drive with frustration free packaging which is also less garbage production and I can order the regular one which has insane amount of garbage for no good reason. I can use LED lights or normal ones. People can be smart about consumption. That is the biggest impact on CO2 production, not something like a piece of paper signed by politicians. That is my point.

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

#214

Post by michaelt »

EGreg wrote: post #207
SVResponsible wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UBI just makes landlords richer. Why not have the country simply pick up the carbon tax for individuals?

What does that even mean? Go into depth on both of your points.

If 10 families are in price competition for 9 houses* the price will be $1 more than the poorest family can afford. Which will probably leave the second-poorest family struggling.

If (in your justified pity for the poorest and second-poorest) you give everyone a free $1000, the equilibrium price will simply rise by $1000 leaving the same families struggling and homeless.

This is the model armchair economists use to explain reports that Bay Area employees paid 4x the national median household income can struggle to find housing.

Of course, if you instead think of Detroit, where many properties are abandoned and some change hands for as little as $500, the model is far less applicable.

*Assuming a simple model of a closed system where all houses are identical, there are no houses outside the system, no possibility of building new houses, and families are as densely packed as possible.

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

#215

Post by tomp »

lutorm wrote: post #206
deegles wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it doesn't make sense to use some of that energy to remove some of that CO2. Of course it does, if the price of CO2 is high enough. If I can capture 1.1 unit of CO2 per unit of CO2 released and it still makes me money, I'll use any energy available. This could happen if e.g. the government subsidizes carbon capture credits or simply if an efficient enough process exists. On top of that, if the price is high enough…

It doesn't matter how high the price on CO2 is if you can't capture 1 unit of CO2 without emitting >1 unit. There's no guarantee that such a technology exists.

On paper, it does...

The energy requirements of sequestration processes may be significant. In one paper, sequestration consumed 25% of the plant's rated 600-megawatt output capacity. After adding CO2 capture and compression, the capacity of the coal-fired power plant is reduced to 457 MW.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_capture_and_storage#Ene...

You can even use it to pump more oil!

In carbon capture and sequestration enhanced oil recovery (CCS EOR), carbon dioxide is injected into an oil field to recover oil that is often never recovered using more traditional methods.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_capture_and_storage#Enh...

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

#216

Post by magicalhippo »

outside1234 wrote: post #189

How about Norway just stop pumping oil to reduce our carbon footprint?

That's an argument many make here in Norway.

It's usually countered by saying "that oil would get pumped anyway, better us doing it 'cause our oil sector has the smallest CO2 impact per barrel of oil pumped" or something along those lines.

A decent argument, but it hinges on a massive "what if".

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

#217

Post by rypskar »

tomp wrote: post #81
StreamBright wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly what most Westerners do not get about China. If you want to reduce emissions stop buying their products.

That’s why I oppose free trade. We need a legislative solution that would ban (or tax highly) products from countries/companies that skim environmental / employment standards...

Who should set the rules? If you should follow national rules in importing country, would not this mean that most European countries would have to ban products from USA?

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

#218

Post by imtringued »

lutorm wrote: post #206
deegles wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it doesn't make sense to use some of that energy to remove some of that CO2. Of course it does, if the price of CO2 is high enough. If I can capture 1.1 unit of CO2 per unit of CO2 released and it still makes me money, I'll use any energy available. This could happen if e.g. the government subsidizes carbon capture credits or simply if an efficient enough process exists. On top of that, if the price is high enough…

It doesn't matter how high the price on CO2 is if you can't capture 1 unit of CO2 without emitting >1 unit. There's no guarantee that such a technology exists.

>There's no guarantee that such a technology exists.

I've recently started hearing phrases like that despite technology X existing. What has changed recently that people have become so ignorant?

Have you ever thought of where all those fossil fuels came from? They had to be captured by plants without emitting more CO2 than they captured. The bigger problem with industrial CO2 capturing processes is that they merely capture it, they still have to store them for millions of years just like plants did when they were turned into coal or oil.

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

#219

Post by rypskar »

StreamBright wrote: post #180
simonbyrne wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? China's per capita emissions are less than half of the US.

And the volume?

By volume don't really make sense, the only way is to count per person. Counting by volume depend on how you decide to put groups together for counting. You would always be able to say that "the others" are larger than the one you are and say that what you do don't matter. But the easiest to change is what you do, not what everyone else do

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

#220

Post by virtastic »

spsrich wrote: post #176

Norwegian taxpayer funds sent direct to Indonesian politicians Swiss bank accounts. Marvellous !

yes, bribing corrupt 3rd world politicians to repress their populations and prevent them from engaging in economic development. the height of western virtue.
Post reply on HN