Carbon credit? Why not just use the term Air quality points?

Question

.
Yes, the earth is experiences change! and we need to be ready for that change and work on WHAT can WE change?. We CAN seriously clean up of air quality. Money is the bait used to reel me in to want to change. Money talks. I've seemed to have heard that before. Gee pay me and I'll promise not to cut down my tree.
On the other side it's the love of money that doesn't want change. Look at the Oil Companies. What are they going to do when we decide to change to using fuels made from grain?

Answer 1

Even burning grain pollutes !!!

You have to come with RATIONALS...

In mean you NEED TO QUANTIFY:
- greenhouse gases emissions
- fossil carbon emissions
- heavy metal emissions
- particular emissions.

You can´t just make qualitative comments like you do.

And you need to know what your goal is, quantified in a unit.
For greenhouse gases, the unit is the "equivalent to a metric tonne of CO2 emitted". (t CO2e)

GREENHOUSE GASES ARE NOT POLLUTANTS !!! The two are different and only sulfur emissions have an effect on both. Therefore, emission market exist for pollutants and for greenhouse gases.
As most emission of pollutants are linked to the combustion of fossil fuels which also release greenhouse gases, the two are linked, but it doesn´t mean they are the same.

Answer 2

Because the effects of atmospheric gases are too complex to lump together in a way that confuses global warming potential (GWP) with air quality. Carbon credit schemes are based on a lot of money changing hands with the hope that some reduction of carbon dioxide emissions will result. However, cars are required to be equipped with catalytic converters specifically to increase the amount of carbon dioxide they emit, and that is done in the name of air quality. So, air quality improvement schemes can exacerbate greenhouse gas emissions blamed for global warming, and carbon credit schemes could arguably impair air quality. Thus, the "love of money" you describe will decide who will end up making money in the name of environmental consciousness even if the end result isn't actually beneficial to the environment.

Also, fuels made from grain pollute in ways that petroleum-based fuels don't. For example, combustion of ethanol produces more aldehydes than combustion of petroleum-based fuels, and some aldehydes are known carcinogens, so grain-based fuels reduce dependence on oil but don't necessarily solve air pollution problems.

Answer 3

Carbon dioxide is NOT an air quality problem. Carbon dioxide is a natural and NECESSARY gas in the atmosphere. It cannot be compared to smog or regular air pollution. Doubling the amount of CO2 in the air is no worse than doubling the amount of oxygen in the air would be. Actually, doubling the amount of oxygen in the air would be MUCH worse than doubling the amount of CO2. So the whole CO2 thing is about maintaining the right amount in the air, not removing it as a pollutant.

Answer 4

ripoff

Answer 5

it does not matter .people are people