
Compensating carbon emissions - bramv
https://carbonaltdelete.eu/
======
hannob
This seems to be based upon the idea that the EU ETS system works. Which it
doesn't. Since many years.

Far too many emission certificates have been given out for free to industries.
And there are plenty of loopholes in the system.

~~~
tom_mellior
> Far too many emission certificates have been given out for free to
> industries.

My understanding was that that was only in the beginning, when the system was
introduced. Businesses that previously polluted for free could continue to
pollute for free for a transitional period. I may be wrong.

> And there are plenty of loopholes in the system.

Do you have a good source to read up on this?

~~~
arekkas
If you speak German, this Wikipedia article explains the issues really well:
[https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/EU-
Emissionshandel](https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/EU-Emissionshandel)

Primary takeaways:

1\. Price is volatile, depending on weather and season

2\. For 2°C goal, the price per metric ton should be $50 but it's only €5.5

3\. Politics - elections, growth, and other factors play a significant role in
setting cap and price.

~~~
tom_mellior
> Price is volatile, depending on weather and season

Not sure why you think that is a problem. _Emissions_ depend on weather and
season. It would not be a market if it didn't react to relevant aspects of
reality.

> price per metric ton should be $50

There are too many certificates, agreed. I wasn't surprised to read that
Parliament advocated stricter rules.

> Politics - elections, growth, and other factors play a significant role in
> setting cap and price.

I don't find that in the article. It does say that the Commission screwed us
over by empting airlines, but well, that's what we expect from the Commission.

Anyway, so far I'm not convinced about the alleged loopholes mentioned above.
The system doesn't work as an efficient market, that is true. As far as I can
tell, that could be fixed by stricter caps.

------
a_imho
_What do I pay for?

As a non-profit organization, we don’t make profit on our operations. All the
payments we receive go directly to deleting emission allowances. The price we
charge you for deleting one emission allowance consists of 3 parts:

1\. The price of the emission allowance. We buy emission allowances upfront
and uses the price that was paid for it. Therefore, the price of an emission
allowance might be different than the spot price at the time that you buy it.
2\. A transaction fee of 15%. We use the transaction fee to cover operational
costs (such as web hosting and payment systems). 3\. VAT of 21%, imposed by
the Belgian government._

~~~
marvin
The VAT is the big problem here; initiatives such as this one should not pay
taxes as long as they are non-profit.

------
Heliosmaster
I would like instead to fund reforestation projects, which can have a positive
impact also on the wildlife and the economy of certain regions, while
capturing CO2

~~~
mlinksva
I would like to instead fund advocacy against carbon subsidies/for carbon
taxes.

------
marvin
I really like this service; if CO2 emissions can actually be reduced simply by
paying this extra amount, it is fantastic.

But is it really this simple? I arrived at ~120€ per year to offset all my CO2
emissions. (I live in a small apartment, don't use a car but fly quite a lot).
If this extra cost is all it takes, we should increase taxes accordingly, at
once. I would think that the price of producing all my goods and services with
only sustainable energy (all the way to the raw materials of the plane I fly)
is a significant multiple of this number. Has anyone done the calculation to
arrive at a more specific number?

~~~
comicjk
The amount is low now because of low-hanging fruit: easy CO2 mitigations that
can only be done a few times. If tens of millions of people bought offsets,
all the easy opportunities would be exhausted and the marginal ton of CO2
would be much more expensive.

That's the theory, anyway. We haven't tried it - currently, demand is limited
even at these low offset prices.

------
alexandercrohde
Why all the defeatism?

Expressing frustration at the status quo is one thing, but I don't see how
expressing a negative attitude toward incremental progress can be seen as more
helpful than holding your tongue.

------
vogon_laureate
This sounds like a naive response to a fundamentally flawed system. The EU ETS
has been a failure from the beginning. Commoditising pollution just leads to
more abstractions and opportunities for fraud, laundering and lack of
accountability. It takes the onus away from government regulation and puts it
in the hands of the market whereby those most responsible for pollution
already have enormous agency to influence market outcomes in their favour.

~~~
ohthehugemanate
Are you implying that massive industrial interests DON'T have the capability
to buy special political influence?

~~~
vogon_laureate
Of course they do, but ceding full control directly to them is hardly the best
counter to that.

------
wz1000
If companies can't pollute in the EU, that just means the pollution happens
elsewhere.

