- Earlier this week, the COP29 parties agreed on standards for a global carbon credit market backed by the United Nations.
- The idea for carbon credit markets is to curb supply gradually in order to motivate emitters to reduce their emissions.
- Carbon credits enjoyed significant popularity a few years back, but a media investigation revealed that most fail to deliver on the promises of conservation and emission reduction.
Carbon credits enjoyed significant popularity a few years back, but a media investigation revealed that most fail to deliver on the promises of conservation and emission reduction. Nevertheless, many continue to push for expanded carbon credit trading, touting it as a win-win solution. However, this argument may be both flawed and costly.
Earlier this week, the COP29 parties agreed on standards for a global carbon credit market backed by the United Nations, aimed at expanding trade in emissions with a view to providing much-needed funds for the energy transition.
“;document.write(write_html);}
A week earlier, voters in Washington opposed a bill proposing to do away with the state’s carbon credit market. And why wouldn’t they, when the state wrote that “This measure would decrease funding for investments in transportation, clean air, renewable energy, conservation, and emissions-reduction.” Any voter would vote against less money for transportation, clean air, and conservation, after all.
“These aren’t going away, and why would they? These carbon ‘cap-and-trade’ programs are capitalist, free-market solutions that allow companies to hedge and monetize their energy transition,” a portfolio manager at a carbon market ETF told Reuters columnist Ross Kerber in comments on the Washington vote.
