> The relative date of an emission (past, present, or future) has
> nothing to do with it being beneficial or not. Perhaps beneficial
> emissions should not be charged against the emitting nation's account
> regardless of when it occurred.
Carbon debt is an argument used by developing nations (including
China) and a number of NGO's to press the case for transfer payments
from developed nations to developing nations to pay for their
emissions reductions and as reparations for supposed damage caused to
them.
I argue that:
1. This poisons the debate
2. It is unjust, because the industrial revolution and the resulting
development of positive technologies such as PV could not have
happened without carbon emissions
3. It is also unjust, because there was neither an intention to cause
harm to other countries nor an awareness that this was likely
4. It is unjust that present generations should pay reparations for
the sins of their ancestors
Let's rather start with the notion that developed nations are wealthy,
have the capacity to do good and the wish to do so, if they think it's
going to make a big difference.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated
venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of
global environmental change.
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the
submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not
gratuitously rude.
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/globalchange
