Old links and climate change threat

[Pierre_C]

Further than that, a cap-and-trade system is actually more flexible than a carbon tax, while at the same time controls emissions better. As demand increases more GHG emissions can be dedicated to transportation and heating and less to, say, concrete production (note here concrete emissions aren’t actually co2).

Matt:


The only thing I'm sure cap and trade will do, is to provide another avenue for the finance industry to make money off of the decline of civilization.

Broken record: March is 10th straight month to be hottest on record
https://phys.org/news/2024-04-broken-10th-straight-month-hottest.html


Tom,

   I do agree with you the financial industry is making money on cap-trade. I’m not advocating for the involvement of the financial industry, but the world unfortunately needs them to nudge companies to participate and improve GHG emission markets.

Cap-trade isn’t a silver bullet, but we have over 30 years of data which shows it works in reducing GHG emissions. The EU's (est. 2005) and California (est. 2006) markets have reduced emissions. The primary issue with cap-trade is guidelines and participation varies from market to market. There are 30 GHG emission markets around the world, and 46 countries either participating or taxing carbon. This is one of the issues with cap and trade, every market is implemented differently.

I won’t get into the details, but there are two types of GHG emission markets, voluntary carbon market (VCM) and compliance carbon market. They are both trading systems but differ in terms of the former is aimed at absorbing GHG while the latter is aimed at reducing emissions.

The voluntary carbon market is where an organization creates its own carbon credits, verified emission reduction (VERs), by capturing/reducing GHG emissions. Good examples are re-forestion, carbon capture, wetland management, etc. Protects create their carbon credits and sell to a buyer - direct or market. VCMs aren't very liquid, value is $2B, with expectations to reach $250B by 2050. VCM aren’t regulated, so they operate in a patchwork of standards and regulations influenced by participants. Hypothetically, a group of golf clubs come together and develop a carbon offset project. The clubs have an option to sell offsets directly, based pre-set price, or float on a market.

Compliance carbon markets, are usually cap and trade schemes. These markets are run by a local or national government - e.g., EU ETS (27 member countries plus Iceland, Liechtenstein, & Norway), UK ETS Authority, RGGI (CT, DE, MD, MA, NJ, NY, RI, VA), Western Climate Initiative (CA, Quebec, & Nova Scotia), etc.. Under cap-trade, the owner of the individual market establishes the market’s framework (carbon limit cap, emission per group, allowance, etc ) and criteria to participate. The standards and framework varies from market to market because there is no international standard. The lack of an international framework creates inefficiencies and allow participates to game the system. Some companies will redistribute their GHG emissions to non-market geography.

The value of the financial sector to cap-trade is to integrate regional and nationals markets, expand participation, improve market infrastructure and financing mechanisms.

As of 2023, World’s ETS market value is $949B and expected to reach $2.9T by 2028, and $22T by 2050.
EU’s Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) world’s largest, $850B
Western Climate Initiative $75B
RGGI $8B
China’s ETS $1B


Examination of Cal’d Cap-Trade on local communities & emission reduction
https://emlab.ucsb.edu/projects/environmental-justice-consequences-californias-cap-and-trade-program

https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/PAP-06-2022-0069/full/html

EU’s cap-trade system reduced CO2
https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.1918128117

Unintended consequence of cap-trade - companies sometime geographically redistribute where emission is generated
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140988319300222

[Mark Pearce]

Amen, Matt Scholfield.


History will record those (and we have them in the UK, too) who made climate change a partisan issue as having done catastrophic harm to the planet AND its economies.

[Tim_Weiman]

If George's question is disingenuous try this one.  "What would you do about the all of the coal fired plants that China and India have brought and will continue to bring on line?"

The effects of climate changes are going to be as harmful, if not more so, to China and India that they will be to the United States. We agree to verifiable treaties exactly because everybody is skeptical of each other. The irony of this whole situation is that Canada, the United States, and Russia are the only nations whose fortunes may actually locally improve from a warming world. In addition, China has been the world leader in renewable energy production. India is third behind the United States.

We also know that they generally care about the issue because they are signatories to the Paris Agreement, and even agreed to the Kyoto Protocol in 1997, unlike the United States. 

The only thing I'm sure cap and trade will do, is to provide another avenue for the finance industry to make money off of the decline of civilization.

"Would have done." The idea that we could institute a effective cap-and-trade system now impossible. Emissions are way too high. We have done nothing but accelerated GHGs since there was a formal consensus that something needed to be done... in 1992. The model I'm referring to is the extremely successful cap-and-trade program to prevent acid rain that was agreed to during the same period.

Again it's also important to remember that this is the same period when the Montreal Protocol was also put in place do deal with ozone depletion, which was also incredibly successful. Another classic political outcome where people generally don't get rewarded for the disaster they prevent, only the disaster they successfully respond to.

It's a completely valid question. Arguments over emissions make me laugh. You'll never get the right data to know the right answers .. but you will get the data they want you to have.

The conspiratorial accusations of the scientific community continues to astound me in my middle age. You can literally sign up for a university lecture series to understand whats happening and why we know it's happening. They will literally teach you how to verify their research.

Climate catastrophe, like cold fusion, is probably always going to be right around the corner.

It is happening right now. This thread is about golf courses that have existed for hundreds of years suddenly falling into the ocean in multiple places. The Great Barrier Reef is dying... it doesn't get more obvious than that. It is likely that the Syrian Civil War was precipitated by an extraordinary drought. I guess I just wonder what people think climate change is going to look like. Barring any changes to ocean currents, it's not going to be some singular cataclysmic, things are just going to become more and more and more expensive. Fire, flood, and other disaster insurance goes way up. Food gets more expensive as we have to move crops 200 miles north. Eco systems are overwhelmed with invasive species that wouldn't have otherwise survived in that region. There will be more and more conflict as people must migrate to other parts of the world, while others fight over fewer resources. It will likely not end the world, but it will cost so much more than if we just started switching to electric renewable power in the early '90s.

---

The real painful aspect of it though, is that the data keeps coming in that the hot models are correct, and there is nothing we can do to stop this, but it's still an every-little-bit-counts scenario where if we change nothing... it still gets worse.

I know folks might think I'm some lefty partisan, but I assure you I am not. I am still just baffled about how climate change is partisan politics in the United States, when it's primarily an economics issue. When the bills start coming due, like the current changes to Federal Flood Insurance, people are going to really start feeling the effects of climate change for the first time. I honestly wonder if those on the financial end of Florida golf course development are already modeling the effect of these increased premiums in their income projections, as Florida may see a recession or even exodus in the next decade or two if near coastal real estate becomes uninsurable.

Matt,


China’s production of renewable energy is about 28% of domestic energy consumption. For India the number is 19%. For the U.S. about 20%.


Global the number is also about 28%.


The largest share of renewable energy production in both China and India is hydro. My understanding is that there isn’t much opportunity to significantly expand this production.

[Matt Schoolfield]

China’s production of renewable energy is about 28% of domestic energy consumption. For India the number is 19%. For the U.S. about 20%.

Global the number is also about 28%.

The largest share of renewable energy production in both China and India is hydro. My understanding is that there isn’t much opportunity to significantly expand this production.

We needn't get into the technical here, China, much like the US, has plenty of room to grow their wind and solar industries, it's just challenging to move and store that energy. There is hope for that in hydrogen-based power plants, as hydrogen is a decent way to transport energy from one region to another. Those are being developed now.

The only reason why China was even brought up was as a reason for the US not to pursue clean energy. Perhaps this is in good faith, but it is important to remember that discussions of electricity generation is a bit of a red herring, as the highest GHG emissions in the US comes from our automobile-based transportation system. It's also important to remember that this is an every-little-bit-counts scenario, so even if there were nations who flout climate goals (like the United States), it would be better if we transitioned away from them anyway.

The reason why this is even a discussion isn't because we are all trying to make it happen, and it's just challenging, it's that many-if-not-most people have decided they just don't care, and they've often given themselves an excuse to not care (like the fact that China can be challenging to work with).

At the end of the day, our historic links courses are rapidly falling into the ocean and will continue to. It's a bummer.

[Niall C]

At the end of the day, our historic links courses are rapidly falling into the ocean and will continue to. It's a bummer.

At the end of the day ? Links golf courses having been at threat probably since they were first laid out, for the simple reason that coastlines do change through natural forces. That's not to decry climate change but rather to illustrate that the forces of change have always been with us.


Niall

[James Reader]

Interesting blog by the North Berwick greenkeeper.


https://nbwlgreens.wixsite.com/nbwlgreens/post/coastal-erosion

[Thomas Dai]

Anyone see the various films of the recent storm in Dubai/UAE? Wonder how the courses there have been affected? Nature is powerful.
Atb

[Sean_A]

Interesting blog by the North Berwick greenkeeper.


https://nbwlgreens.wixsite.com/nbwlgreens/post/coastal-erosion

Folks don’t realize how bad the situation is at NB. In my 35 years of playing NB, the beach has increased dramatically. I can see a tee for 3 being built between the 2nd green and the burn. I assume the marker post behind 14 green was going to fall so it was removed. The erosion along 13 is noticeable as well. It’s bad news.


Ciao

[Tim Gallant]

Interesting blog by the North Berwick greenkeeper.


https://nbwlgreens.wixsite.com/nbwlgreens/post/coastal-erosion

Folks don’t realize how bad the situation is at NB. In my 35 years of playing NB, the beach has increased dramatically. I can see a tee for 3 being built between the 2nd green and the burn. I assume the marker post behind 14 green was going to fall so it was removed. The erosion along 13 is noticeable as well. It’s bad news.


Ciao

Sean,


The post was only removed to repaint. It (for now) has nothing to do with erosion and will be replaced soon