"Say Company X manufactures a material; one day, it figures out how to manufacture the material more efficiently, or make it lighter, or some such. The material is used by Company Y to make a product. With X's more-efficient, lighter material, Y is able to make its product lighter and more efficient, and thus reduce the product's CO2 emissions. Who gets credit for the carbon reduction? "
Have I missed something in this example? Surely it's the second company? Theirs are the carbon emissions that go down.
The referred article goes all complex on the matter but the basic thing is whose emissions have gone down?
Carbon confusion | Gristmill: The environmental news blog | Grist Magazine:
Nous like scouse or French -oui? We wee whee all the way ... to mind us a bunch of thunks. Too much information? How could that be?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A review of Common Threads
Most of my Christian life, I've been what is usually labelled "an inclusivist". Lately I've been re-examining what that ...
-
Interesting insight into the Muslim world: my favourite progresive muslim site has been hacked and attacked by islamists accusing those who ...
-
This book is one that I now seriously consider recommending to the student Christian groups I'm in touch with whose basis is Evangelic...
-
This is the normal package I've noticed being advertised: "It is expected that for a House-for-Duty appointment the priest will car...
No comments:
Post a Comment