tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15306282.post3911844692695285180..comments2023-11-03T02:18:41.733-07:00Comments on WattHead - Energy News and Commentary: News From My Backyard: City of Portland Awards Grants to Five Local Biofuels ProjectsJesse Jenkinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00297127385884430247noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15306282.post-29143916365805283152007-03-23T01:53:00.000-07:002007-03-23T01:53:00.000-07:00For some reason, commenting isn't enabled for your...For some reason, commenting isn't enabled for your post on the "Alternative Fuel Standard Act".<BR/><BR/>It's interesting that Europe has taken the same (or at least a very similar) approach as the US, namely legislation that makes a certain percentage of biofuels mandatory by given dates.<BR/><BR/>I've got some concerns about life cycle analysis as proposed in California. <BR/><BR/>When LCA is purely academic, disagreements about co-product credits, or the greenhouse gas emissions associated with fertiliser use or irrigation, don't matter a great deal. <BR/><BR/>They do, when there is money involved. <BR/><BR/>What makes me even more worried is the terrible results achieved by the Clean Development Mechanism.<BR/><BR/>There greenhouse gas emission reductions are measured against a baseline, giving a huge incentive for manipulation and profiteering.<BR/><BR/>CFC's are extremely potent greenhouse gases, and a number of plants in the third world emit them rather than incinerate them cheaply. <BR/><BR/>What CDM has done is to give an incentive to developing countries to delay legislation outlawing the venting of CFC's.<BR/><BR/>Instead, they rather go for CDM money. <BR/><BR/>Incineration is only going to cost around a hundred million Dollars, but with the CDM scheme, it's worth 5 billion. <BR/><BR/>Rather than legislate the CFC venting out of existence, the Chinese government taxes the CDM receipts at 65% and allows the CFC manufacturers to keep the rest (which even with a 65% tax still leaves the CFC manufacturers with a 1000%+ profit).<BR/><BR/>These kinds of shenanigans make me very sceptical about any scheme that involves huge complexity and potential for manipulation. When there's money involved, people will want to game the system. Why make it easy for them?<BR/><BR/>If greenhouse gas emission reductions are the objective, I think taxes (per tonne of carbon on fossil fuels) and regulations (say on methane from landfills or farms) are the best options. These are much harder to circumvent.Heikohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06839810379331430109noreply@blogger.com