Switzerland Is Paying Poorer Nations to Cut Emissions on Its Behalf
1–10 of 27 posts
Re: Switzerland Is Paying Poorer Nations to Cut Emissions on Its Behalf
#2Why are people acting like this is a bad thing? It's not like the same amount of CO2 causes more global warming if it's emitted by Switzerland than it does if it's emitted by Ghana or Peru. If I buy my neighbor solar panels, isn't that just as good for the environment as if I bought myself solar panels instead?
Re: Switzerland Is Paying Poorer Nations to Cut Emissions on Its Behalf
#3There is a lot more low hanging fruit in the developing world. Money spent their could potentially yield bigger savings.
Consider countries like Mongolia, where the dirtiest coal is used to heat homes. This is both an environmental and health crisis.
Re: Switzerland Is Paying Poorer Nations to Cut Emissions on Its Behalf
#4Why are people acting like this is a bad thing? It's not like the same amount of CO2 causes more global warming if it's emitted by Switzerland than it does if it's emitted by Ghana or Peru. If I buy my neighbor solar panels, isn't that just as good for the environment as if I bought myself solar panels instead?
The people who are being paid aren't the same people as the people who are having to make do without.
Re: Switzerland Is Paying Poorer Nations to Cut Emissions on Its Behalf
#5Why are people acting like this is a bad thing? It's not like the same amount of CO2 causes more global warming if it's emitted by Switzerland than it does if it's emitted by Ghana or Peru. If I buy my neighbor solar panels, isn't that just as good for the environment as if I bought myself solar panels instead?
The people who are being paid aren't the same people as the people who are having to make do without.
Read the article. Switzerland is already emitting less than a third per capita than an average American. Probably got stuck with the same percentage reduction to meet some global quotas, and they are increasing efficiency in other countries to meet it. I see this as double win, yet we complain here.
Re: Switzerland Is Paying Poorer Nations to Cut Emissions on Its Behalf
#6> Switzerland Is Paying Poorer Nations to Cut Emissions on Its Behalf
Or as someone in an east european country said: we are selling carbon (CO2 emissions) certificates because we don't polute enough.
The problem here is not Switzerland. The ptoblem are the carbon (CO2 emissions) certificates.
Re: Switzerland Is Paying Poorer Nations to Cut Emissions on Its Behalf
#7Why are people acting like this is a bad thing? It's not like the same amount of CO2 causes more global warming if it's emitted by Switzerland than it does if it's emitted by Ghana or Peru. If I buy my neighbor solar panels, isn't that just as good for the environment as if I bought myself solar panels instead?
There's been a well funded disinformation campaign against anything that would reduce the use of fossil fuels.
They've kind of lost the battle on "are renewables a scam", "are EVs a scam", "is climate change a scam" etc. but still with pockets of resistance. Unfortunately they were fighting it on multiple fronts and are still winning on some.
One where they're still winning is "are carbon credits a scam".
(For completeness, in the US they're still doing okay on "is recycling a scam" and "are carbon fees a scam")
So it's basically a succesful artificial conspiracy theory that we're dealing with.
Rich countries paying poorer countries to escape fossil fuel dependency is an obviously good idea, but like anything it's not perfect, so if you get people angry enough then you can slow it down and sell more fossil fuels.
Re: Switzerland Is Paying Poorer Nations to Cut Emissions on Its Behalf
#8> President Luis Arce of Bolivia called the idea tantamount to “carbon capitalism.”
That's an interesting summary.
Re: Switzerland Is Paying Poorer Nations to Cut Emissions on Its Behalf
#9Why are people acting like this is a bad thing? It's not like the same amount of CO2 causes more global warming if it's emitted by Switzerland than it does if it's emitted by Ghana or Peru. If I buy my neighbor solar panels, isn't that just as good for the environment as if I bought myself solar panels instead?
There's been a well funded disinformation campaign against anything that would reduce the use of fossil fuels. They've kind of lost the battle on "are renewables a scam", "are EVs a scam", "is climate change a scam" etc. but still with pockets of resistance. Unfortunately they were fighting it on multiple fronts and are still winning on some. One where they're still winning is "are carbon credits a scam". (For comple…
Recycling is a scam. Just about everything you recycle gets sent to the landfill anyway. The only difference is that you feel good about yourself as you sort it into the recycling bin. One exception, I’ve been told, is aluminum.
Re: Switzerland Is Paying Poorer Nations to Cut Emissions on Its Behalf
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's been a well funded disinformation campaign against anything that would reduce the use of fossil fuels. They've kind of lost the battle on "are renewables a scam", "are EVs a scam", "is climate change a scam" etc. but still with pockets of resistance. Unfortunately they were fighting it on multiple fronts and are still winning on some. One where they're still winning is "are carbon credits a scam". (For comple…
Recycling is a scam. Just about everything you recycle gets sent to the landfill anyway. The only difference is that you feel good about yourself as you sort it into the recycling bin. One exception, I’ve been told, is aluminum.
Well, it depends on how disfunctional your country is, but generally that's not true:
https://www.eea.europa.eu/ims/waste-recycling-in-europe
And in the US per-state:
https://www.eunomia.co.uk/reports-tools/the-50-states-of-rec...
> The study ranked each state according to its recycling rate for CCPMs in 2018, with the 10 states with the best recycling rates comprising: Maine (72%); Vermont (62%); Massachusetts (55%); Oregon (55%); Connecticut (52%); New York (51%); Minnesota (49%); Michigan (48%); New Jersey (46%); and Iowa (44%).
Note for comparison purposes, that US report is on CCPM (plastic bottles and trays, glass bottles and jars, aluminium cans, steel cans and cardboard and boxboard), which the EU calls out seperately as "packaging waste" with an average of 66%.
And it's 'material reprocessed rather than material collected for recycling' they count.
That recent Greenpeace USA study suggests that only type 1 and 2 plastics are close to meeting their 'actually being recycled into more of the same stuff' targets across the USA.