The bravado of Col Rouge is boundless, but I'll ignore the silly personal remarks.

Enron found a way to corrupt accounting processes but they did it through corruption, not by following the rules of accounting. The accounting company that overlooked the fraud is out of business.

Where trading systems are in place, a carbon credit no more mythical than a government bond or an electronic transaction.

The people who pay for the benefits are those countries who are significantly polluting the atmosphere. And yes, these are the developed nations.

It might be germaine to point out that the carbon trading scheme in the EU has virtually collapsed in the past few days.

"It might be germaine to point out that the carbon trading scheme in the EU has virtually collapsed in the past few days.
Posted by VK3AUU, Tuesday, 20 February 2007 7:15:43 PM
"

Germaine who? Who did point this out besides you? Or did you mean germane?

A link or two would be interesting, here - thanks.

Overall, I'm surprised at the blinkered view most folks are taking regarding the Causes of Our Ills. Human numbers are but one part of a global system which is out of balance.

Have a look at the Wikipedia article on the Club of Rome's report on Limits to Growth:

"Five variables were examined in the original model, on the assumption that exponential growth accurately described their patterns of increase. These variables are: world population, industrialization, pollution, food production and resource depletion. The authors intended to explore the possibility of a sustainable feedback pattern which would be achieved by altering growth trends among the five variables."

All 5 aspects interact. To focus on one only is to mistake a pushbike for a Harley. To address one crisis only, without considering causal links (and thus feedback patterns) to and from other variables, is like trying to kickstart the pushbike.

Hey, Baggy, where is your article on Environmental Ethics and Ethical Investment? Rev up your Harley, old son!

David Latimer “The bravado of Col Rouge is boundless, but I'll ignore the silly personal remarks.”
Big of you to ignore how you “slunk away “

“Enron found a way to corrupt accounting processes but they did it through corruption, not by following the rules of accounting. The accounting company that overlooked the fraud is out of business.”

And Carbon trading, through lack of reliable measurement lacks an accounting basis.

“Where trading systems are in place, a carbon credit no more mythical than a government bond or an electronic transaction.”

That is what the signatories to the original charter of the League of Nations thought too, until Hitler f**ked over their system and it was a bit late them.

First principal of responsible management, “if you cannot measure it you cannot manage it”. Carbon trading can have all the “system” you like but it will remain a crock because it cannot be accurately or reasonably measured and those measurements audited.

Different to the number of government bonds or electronic transactions, “carbon emissions” will remain an ethereal assumption based on nebulous measurement and no basis for a quantified transaction

Would that I could be so certain as Mr Rouge.

I'm hoping to read a dissertation from him about why the bumblebee cannot fly. Certainly its aerodynamics are most unorthodox, and I am not sure we have yet identified the necessary and sufficient parameters involved; then, of course, there is the problem of precise and reproducible measurement!

Instead of complaining about all the things which either don't work, or shouldn't, why not focus on the challenge of expressing one's environmental ethics through the free market, by encouraging stockholders and other investors to put their money where their mouths are?

And of course, I would love to hear the author of the article comment on this pertinent topic. Perhaps he has an idea or two on ethical torture chambers that could offer a "friendly" investment opportunity.

Professor Bagaric should try reading something in the area of moral philosophy that is a bit more sophisticated than Peter Singer's Practical Ethics. Perhaps that way he might sound like he knew what he was talking about.