Who would agree to a system of Carbon Rationing?

Question

Forget taxes, offsetting and voluntary sacrifices, the only way to meet the necessary cuts in carbon emissions is by allocating everyone and equal share that they are allowed to produce.

It’s quite simple. We set a national limit, to be gradually reduced over time, divide it by the population and bingo: your individual carbon allowance. People who want to travel by plain or leave their heating on max all autumn can buy any excess carbon rations from those sustainable enough (or to poor to burn lots of fuel) and have some left over.

The question is, in this current climate of ‘no such thing as society’ and individualistic self righteousness, is their enough demand for a system that would so restrict out lives?

Would you vote for carbon rationing?

If not, what would it take to convince you?

Answer 1

Actually I would. I strongly support emission reduction. At this point I don't think such a plan would stand a chance of being adopted. Far too many people either do not believe Global Warming is real, do not view it as a problem, or do not believe there is anything we can do. Those folks will not act until there is no choice. Thier day is coming quicker than many think.

I was please to finally hear the President acknowledge climate change. Hopefully others in denial will follow suit. We still have a lot of people quoting the very small, and still dwindling hand full of psuedo-scientists that deny this crises. Surveys of science document published in the past decade come with 0% studies released by reputable scientists denying Global Warming. Still I constantly hear "a lot of scientists say it isn't happening".

Your plan or one similar will have a lot better chance when the public here quits parroting political lines and starts educating itself.

As for those that compare Global Warming to the Y2K scare. Y2K was a theoretical situation. Global Warming is happening now. Anyone who can say they don't 'believe' in Global Warming can only be 'not believe' intentionally. It isn't a case of you not being able to see the problem. It is a case of you refusing to see the problem.

Answer 2

Carbon rationing does seem to be a good idea as to a means of making people think about their use of energy in countries where we have an abundance of such things however, I do think there is an obvious way by which richer countries will exploit the system in a similar way to stock markets to buy a lot of extra emissions from the poorer countries most likely at a cheaper price than if they were to buy off their other well provided for neighbours creating an environmental class system on top of the already widening rich/poor divide. It may be seen as a way to change minds whilst circumventing government legislation but without backing from on high (particularly in America) it is unlikely to have the desired effect that we would want from it.

Answer 3

Couldn't give a toss. My wife and I both have gas-guzzlers, don't recycle, we're totally energy-inefficient and I work on an oilrig that spews shite into the sea 24/7.

Literally couldn't give one hoot about the climate or environment - I'll leave it to people like you to obsess about it and talk about 'global' issues. I suppose you believe Greenpeace as well? That bunch are ineducated liars - they misinform the public, creating panic, and expense. Just look at the Brent Spar, all lies from Greenpeace. I was part of the team there, Greenpeace lied to the papers, press, TV, everyone. Losers.

Like I say, I don't give a cow's c*nt about how much carbon I use - the more the better. I pay tax through the nose, that's my contribution. It's mostly lazy left-wing ban-everything-brigade that is on the climate bandwagon, but it doesn't rub with me. Get off their lazy scrounging fat ar ses and get a job, and learn to pay their way. Fu ck em.

Answer 4

I don't know whether you are talking about the world or this country but if it's the UK I would like to point out that out that this country produces only 2% of the world's carbon ouput. Have you also not thought about the damage to the environment caused by this country exporting its rubbish to China where the pollution problem is worse than ever.

The poeple in this country are controlled, watched and taxed quite enough thank you very much.

Answer 5

Bella the whole Cap and commerce plan pushed at Copenhagen is according to climate fashions printed in 1998 that have considering the fact that did no longer anticipate real climate interior of here 12 years. something from 2006 is outrageously present day by ability of evaluation. i think of carbon rationing could convey approximately Politicians miraculous from lamp-posts to end them emitting any further carbon.

Answer 6

No. It just isn't right. You cannot force people to help the environment just because you think that they should. Anyways, if you did, people could find a way to get around it and then jails would be even more full because you would have to prosecute them if you wanted to keep the system going. One of the basic principles in the human mind is to rebel and not be controlled. People would not stand for the government monitoring their travel and heat.
If you could guarantee me that nothing else would change and everyone would obey, I might consider it.

Answer 7

I like the idea. It's a freemarket approach to a growing problem. The free market is much more efficient than any government regulation has ever been.

Answer 8

No, because I don't believe in global warming any more that I believed in Y2K.

Maybe you are ready to line up and let politicians control your life, because you believe some fairytale, but I'm not.

I can't believe how gullible some people are. How many times do you have to be lied to before you catch on?

Answer 9

Hold your breath...