Mike: I didn't say incentivizing was a good idea. I simply explained how one would do it.
David. On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 11:22 AM, Mike MacCracken <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi David—Your proposal is just the reason why there is resistance to > geoengineering. The idea is to not have geoengineering slow the needed rapid > reduction in GHG emissions, but to be in addition to it—for given how > rapidly the environment is changing we will need to have geoengineering as > well as aggressive mitigation. > > We really need to find another alternative to incentivizing > geoengineering—for example, having funding for it come out of what would > otherwise need to be going to defending the coasts against sea level rise—so > like an insurance premium of coastal homeowners—you only get insurance if > you live along the coasts if you pay an additional amount for > geoengineering. > > Mike MacCracken > > > On 12/12/08 9:13 AM, "David Schnare" <[email protected]> wrote: > > You would link it to carbon emissions , allowing greater emissions in > direct trade with investment on mass scale carbon sequestration and a > premium (lesser but still real emissions allowances) for X years for SRM. > > > > > On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 7:30 AM, Alvia Gaskill <[email protected]> wrote: > > How would you "incentivize" investment in geoengineering? > > http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU0812/S00286.htm > > *Coalition Warns Governments Against Emissions Cap > **Friday, 12 December 2008, 3:33 pm > Press Release: New Zealand Business Roundtable* > > > EMBARGOED UNTIL 1:00PM FRIDAY 12 DECEMBER > > *Climate Change Coalition Warns Governments Against Global Cap on > Emissions > * > As the eleven thousand participants in the United Nations Climate Change > Conference descend on Poznan, Poland, this week, a coalition of 50 civil > society organisations from 38 countries is warning governments against > opting for strategies that would "do little to protect humanity against the > threat of climate change but would drastically increase the threat of global > economic catastrophe." > > The Civil Society Coalition on Climate Change (www.csccc.info < > http://www.csccc.info/> ) of which the New Zealand Business Roundtable is > a member, has today released a new report with a stark message to > governments about the economic flow-on effect, particularly on poorer > countries, of adopting a global cap on emissions. > > Describing the idea as "economic lunacy", the report's author, Professor > Julian Morris, said a global cap would divert resources into "low carbon" > technologies and away from more productive uses. > > "This would slow economic growth and harm the ability of the poor to > address the real problems they face every day, such as diseases, water > scarcity, and inadequate nutrition", said Professor Morris. > > The report canvases policy options available to governments and concludes > that adaptation, coupled with improving the institutions that enable > economic growth, is likely to be the best response to gradual warming. It > further suggests that one approach to addressing the remote but possible > threat of catastrophic warming would be to incentivise investment in > geoengineering, and advises governments 'hell bent' on limiting carbon > emissions to consider a tax on emissions rather than a cap and trade scheme. > > > Business Roundtable executive director Roger Kerr said the report, titled > *Which Policy to Address Climate Change? *was a timely and valuable > addition to the debate on what constitutes an appropriate response to > climate change. > > "We have long held the view, as set out in the attached submission, that a > cap and trade scheme of the type being considered in New Zealand would > impose heavy costs on households, businesses and the economy. It is also > likely to discourage investment and lead to losses in business confidence > and jobs. > > "It is to be hoped that common sense will prevail in Poznan and that a few > European ministers will not succeed in imposing further pain on countries > already struggling with much more serious problems", said Mr Kerr. > > > ENDS > > > > > > -- David W. Schnare Center for Environmental Stewardship --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
