This trading lark is for pussies, let's all be like Al Gore and 'trade' carbons

[oiltanker]

the monetisation of carbon is a dangerous illusion that something is happening.

like monetisation of fat instead of slimming.

or as one carbon trader said like ' selling papal indulgences'.

its just another racket. which is great if you are on the inside of that.

 

[robster970]

its just another racket. which is great if you are on the inside of that.

same old, same old then.

 

[dcraig1]

Wouldn't that jusy cause an inflationary effect and further compound the speculative upside of a buy and hold approach now? Essentially the demand will exceed the supply for a long, long time regardless of how govenrments handle the problem until technology finishes innovating and then scales to create liquidity in this market. I agree that low liquidity will indeed create volatility in the early days but as it matures and liquidity needs are met, the lag will just force price up.

Did that make any sense?

You could well be right. I also think that what will happen in the shorter term depends on what comes out of Copenhagen - if indeed anything much comes out of Copenhagen.

 

[dcraig1]

the monetisation of carbon is a dangerous illusion that something is happening.

Yes. But perhaps it is better than nothing at all. It's all a pretty bleak picture really.

 

[robster970]

I suppose the only things I do know are:

1. We generate too much CO2
2. We cannot process the amount of CO2 the world is generating.
3. There is a demand supply imbalance that they are trying to address by monetising it and the demand is greater than the supply.

It all gets quite random after that. Might take a punt anyway.

 

[oiltanker]

Yes. But perhaps it is better than nothing at all. It's all a pretty bleak picture really.

better investing in tech than making a few people rich and pushing prices up for everyone else?

the uk doesn't even have a micro generation sell back to the grid model. there are millions of acres of factory space unused. but no the govt go for the most expensive, slow and difficult option of offshore generation.

the vested interests of the multinational energy companies are not going to give up billions in easy cash from the uk without a fight.

 

[oiltanker]

....We generate too much CO2....

what about volcanoes? one good blow out would change the climate for decades.

does the co2 come from ordinary life or from things like uncontrolled burning of forests?

for me the solutions are not monetisation that will only make a few people rich and act as papal indulgences e.g if you buy the credits you can pollute as much as you like idea.

 

[robster970]

....We generate too much CO2....

what about volcanoes? one good blow out would change the climate for decades.

does the co2 come from ordinary life or from things like uncontrolled burning of forests?

for me the solutions are not monetisation that will only make a few people rich and act as papal indulgences e.g if you buy the credits you can pollute as much as you like idea.

It would do and it has in the past. Whether we are causing environmental change or whether the world is changing again in one of it's cycles that we as puny animals have no concept of wrt to it's 4 billion year existence will be the subject of debate for a long time. If out time is up as a species, whether self inflicted or not, our time is up. We are just animals at the end of the day, and not as bright as we like to think we are. On an evolutionary basis other 'less intelligent' animals have been around a lot longer than we have.

 

[dcraig1]

better investing in tech than making a few people rich and pushing prices up for everyone else?

the uk doesn't even have a micro generation sell back to the grid model. there are millions of acres of factory space unused. but no the govt go for the most expensive, slow and difficult option of offshore generation.

the vested interests of the multinational energy companies are not going to give up billions in easy cash from the uk without a fight.

I think it is inevitable that costs will rise no matter how you account for the costs of environmental destruction which for so long has largely been a free ride.

Having said that there are a plethora of things that can be done. How about legislating for a large component of solar power in all new buildings and proper micro sell back?

What about large scale government investment in R&D. What about say any extra billion dollars a year to the CSIRO here in Australia for appropriate R&D. The CSIRO is well respected and has a fine track record. Small beer compared to the costs of the financial crisis.

Better school transport so that fewer kids are driven to/from school.

One could go on for pages of desirable activities, but it is clear that comprehensive planning and decent hard hitting regulation is absolutely essential. Mr Market is not going to sort this one out.

 

[glyder]

The Real Global Warming Disaster

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Real-Global...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1257414109&sr=8-1

find more of his writing here
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/

He's not a warmist. Thats for sure.

 

[robster970]

If scientists can't even get evidence of the existence of the fundamental particle/force that makes gravity work then I'm not terrribly receptive to a journo or al gore's conjecture on whether things are heating up or cooling down based upon empirical evidence collected over 150 years wrt to a timespan of 3.8 Billion years.

The simple fact is that we don't really know and like normal human behaviour, we deal badly with uncertainty. We are so primitive.

 

[dcraig1]

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Real-Global...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1257414109&sr=8-1

find more of his writing here
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/

He's not a warmist. Thats for sure.

Some source heh? a right wing journalist from the Telegraph.

The first piece on his blog is downright misleading on Gavin Schmdit. You can read what Gavin Schmidt has to say about corrections to the GISS data here:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/08/1934-and-all-that/

 

[crude_lover]

Thought I would give a brief input into carbon trading as I have been involved in it for a few years now, its definitely a market that has grow very well over the last few years to the point where you can trade it on a short term basis.
The main participants in carbon are not trading it directionally, most places are simply just trying to bulk up the list of carbon credits they own, all the large commodity houses will have hundreds of carbon credits expiring at certain dates from few months to years away.
At the most where I am at the only time we have traded the contracts purely for short term profit, we have looked at it from a relative value point of view.

 

[glyder]

Thanks DCraig,
but Well, I'm not a warmist either. So that blog does nothing for me.
Strange thing is from my relatively frugal, fresh and healthy, cycling, composting, veg growing moderate way of life I might appear close to a reasonable model of low carbon behaviour.
But I live how I live because I like to. I don't like to waste any resources out of common sense and decency and because it is how I was brought up.
And yes that is a good model of lifestyle to encourage IMHO. It hurts noone and does a little good.
But I can do without the fines, penalties, taxes, lies and crap from left wing
politicians (which is most of them) fooled and suckered into this GW business by marxists with their new global cause. They really just make me want to buy a 4X4 just to spite them and exercise one of the blessed few freedoms I have left while it is still there.
Really I don't believe barely a word of the global warming nonsense and I won't until I see we are all burning. Which I see no sign of at all right now. And TBH I think many of the population feels the same and is sick of the propaganda and theft from our pockets by these loony leaders the UK and rest of the world has nowadays. The average Joe couldn't give a stuff about Copenhagen or any of it.
If protesters like plane stupid and greenpeace really want to change things I suggest they go and start trying to exercise their right to protest in Beijing and Moscow, sort out some real polluters, globally before telling me how to live my life in my corner of the world. Off to Siberia with the lot of them I say

 

[dcraig1]

Thanks DCraig,
but Well, I'm not a warmist either. So that blog does nothing for me.
Strange thing is from my relatively frugal, fresh and healthy, cycling, composting, veg growing moderate way of life I might appear close to a reasonable model of low carbon behaviour.
But I live how I live because I like to. I don't like to waste any resources out of common sense and decency and because it is how I was brought up.
And yes that is a good model of lifestyle to encourage IMHO. It hurts noone and does a little good.
But I can do without the fines, penalties, taxes, lies and crap from left wing
politicians (which is most of them) fooled and suckered into this GW business by marxists with their new global cause. They really just make me want to buy a 4X4 just to spite them and exercise one of the blessed few freedoms I have left while it is still there.
Really I don't believe barely a word of the global warming nonsense and I won't until I see we are all burning. Which I see no sign of at all right now. And TBH I think many of the population feels the same and is sick of the propaganda and theft from our pockets by these loony leaders the UK and rest of the world has nowadays. The average Joe couldn't give a stuff about Copenhagen or any of it.
If protesters like plane stupid and greenpeace really want to change things I suggest they go and start trying to exercise their right to protest in Beijing and Moscow, sort out some real polluters, globally before telling me how to live my life in my corner of the world. Off to Siberia with the lot of them I say

Sorry, you really are delusional if you think the researches in climate science are predominantly Marxists.

You also miss the point about the two blogs. The ****** from the Telegraph is only interesting in discrediting Gavin Schmidt. He is not interested in whether errors in the GISS data (that have been subsequently corrected) were of such a serious nature as to invalidate conclusions that have been derived from that data.

Errors in data are certainly not desirable but they happen in data all the time. And they get picked up by peer review and further observation and corrected. Unlike the politically motivated unscientific stuff that comes from right wing bloggers that has no quality control and never gets corrected.

 

[virtuos0]

It's bloody cold today

 

[Black Swan]

Sorry, you really are delusional if you think the researches in climate science are predominantly Marxists.

You also miss the point about the two blogs. The ****** from the Telegraph is only interesting in discrediting Gavin Schmidt. He is not interested in whether errors in the GISS data (that have been subsequently corrected) were of such a serious nature as to invalidate conclusions that have been derived from that data.

Errors in data are certainly not desirable but they happen in data all the time. And they get picked up by peer review and further observation and corrected. Unlike the politically motivated unscientific stuff that comes from right wing bloggers that has no quality control and never gets corrected.

We are witnessing the beginnings of a 50 year plan by globalist forces in order to re-educate/re-programme the badly educated masses in an effort to wean 'us' off fossil fuel reliance. The "let's not harm the cuddly panda" strategy (who should simply be allowed to die off, given its genetically pathetic) or K2 from melting is simply being used as a vehicle for gross misdirection.

To witness children and simple adults being spoon fed global warning nonsense, whilst the global forces crusade their illegal wars in order to land grab and ring fence the dying embers of energy and/or routes to energy supply, is deeply worrying given the baffling hypocrisy. The carbon costs of these illegal wars, given the vast movement of hardware, is incalculable.

If climate change is upon us it should have nothing to do with individual reponsibility; taking less journeys, re-cycling, switching to low energy light bulbs.. is insulting in the extreme...

Powerful govts. could stop this inane squawk re. global warming and reduce waste overnight. However, they know that 'waste', as a bi-product of industry, is a huge business. For example, only 15%-20% of food produced is actually consumed, strip out that waste chain and the impact would be terminal for the global economy. That example can be replicated for so many other industries.

The shock to 'the system', once we reach to 'end of days' for fossil fuels, will be truly terrifying IMHO. As a simple example, there are no alternatives enabling the wasteful mass long haul flights to continue as reserves deplete and whilst on that subject it global powers were truly interested in climate change they could make a sweeping gesture today and forbid any passenger planes not 80% full to abandon their flight...That'll never happen until its too late, not too late for 'the planet' but too late as the last drop of fuel, which rivers of blood have been shed for, has been finally used...

 

[dcraig1]

We are witnessing the beginnings of a 50 year plan by globalist forces in order to re-educate/re-programme the badly educated masses in an effort to wean 'us' off fossil fuel reliance. The "let's not harm the cuddly panda" strategy (who should simply be allowed to die off, given its genetically pathetic) or K2 from melting is simply being used as a vehicle for gross misdirection.

To witness children and simple adults being spoon fed global warning nonsense, whilst the global forces crusade their illegal wars in order to land grab and ring fence the dying embers of energy and/or routes to energy supply, is deeply worrying given the baffling hypocrisy. The carbon costs of these illegal wars, given the vast movement of hardware, is incalculable.

If climate change is upon us it should have nothing to do with individual reponsibility; taking less journeys, re-cycling, switching to low energy light bulbs.. is insulting in the extreme...

Powerful govts. could stop this inane squawk re. global warming and reduce waste overnight. However, they know that 'waste', as a bi-product of industry, is a huge business. For example, only 15%-20% of food produced is actually consumed, strip out that waste chain and the impact would be terminal for the global economy. That example can be replicated for so many other industries.

The shock to 'the system', once we reach to 'end of days' for fossil fuels, will be truly terrifying IMHO. As a simple example, there are no alternatives enabling the wasteful mass long haul flights to continue as reserves deplete and whilst on that subject it global powers were truly interested in climate change they could make a sweeping gesture today and forbid any passenger planes not 80% full to abandon their flight...That'll never happen until its too late, not too late for 'the planet' but too late as the last drop of fuel, which rivers of blood have been shed for, has been finally used...

You really can't put one and one together can you? Environmental destruction and illegal imperialist wars are two sides of the same coin. Of course the waste is everywhere. Of course some of the powers that be like carbon trading because it allows business as usual or some illusion thereof. And some of the powers that be are fighting tooth and nail against taking any action at all.

But global warming is quite real - it's in the data. And so is the related problem of ocean acidification. If that offends your politics because collective action is required to address it - well thats just tough.

And low energy light bulbs are an excellent idea - they knocked quite a bit off my power bill, but as you say a drop in the ocean.

I don't have a lot of sympathy for the "we are all responsible" bit because the world we live in individually was not necessarily of our own making, but playing ostrich when the scientific evidence is now available is not likely to be looked on kindly by history.

 

[glyder]

Sorry, you really are delusional if you think the researches in climate science are predominantly Marxists.

You also miss the point about the two blogs.

No I'm not delusional. And I do not miss the point.
I quite often like to read views I
disagree with, to learn from them or be wound up by them.

And I don't agree with it, along with many others who do not.
And I do not believe in the global warming, along with many others
who do not.

The GW science is the antithesis of free speech and thought as it aims to appear consensual and really does not appreciate detractors. Science should proceed by argument. So should politics. GW theories proceed by dogma and mind control.
Its an industry and a movement now. Even worse maybe its a religion, in the UK global warming beliefs are now being accepted by the courts as equivalent to religious beliefs. Which is quite apt in a sense because it requires a similar leap of faith.


EDIT: and here's a handy guide to this new religion
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinio...r-a-guide-to-the-new-ecoreligion-1815647.html

 

[Black Swan]

But global warming is quite real - it's in the data. And so is the related problem of ocean acidification. QUOTE]

Jeez another mind fooked zealot...crack on...