Told you so! Emissions trading is just another greenwash scam.

"A flagship European scheme designed to fight global warming is set to
hand hundreds of millions of pounds to some of Britain's most
polluting companies, with little or no benefit to the environment, an
investigation by the Guardian has revealed.

Dozens of multinational firms stand to benefit from the windfall,
which comes from the over-allocation of carbon permits under the
European emissions trading scheme.

The permits are given to companies by the government, and are supposed
to account for their carbon pollution over the next five years. But
figures published by the European Commission show that many companies
have been allocated far too many permits, which they can sell for
cash.

The scheme is supposed to only distribute as many permits as companies
require, with one permit allocated for each tonne of CO2 produced.

Doug wrote:

Has anyone here ever said any different and, what has this got to do with
transport?

On 13 Sep, 08:32, Doug riseup.net> wrote:

Read that case on manslaughter yet, Gollum, you useless old turd?

In article bt.com>, Brimstone says...

Indeed. I think anyone with half a brain realised what a con job it
was.

Doug riseup.net> wrote:

No you didn't.

"Steve Firth" <%%steve%%@malloc.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1in7qs5.1eo5lop1khxsg0N%%%%steve%%@malloc.co.uk...

Latest New Scientist claims a bowlful of cereal is as "carbon friendly" as
7km in a 4x4

Funny old world innit?

On 14 Sep, 11:38, %%ste...@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote:

What other things, like cars, meat and dairy, oil?

As I have frequently pointed out, Filth, I am not perfect but I am
still better than you in several respects, which is not difficult to
claim.

On 13 Sep, 08:56, "Brimstone" yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

Duh! Transport has emissions.

I seem to recall not all that long ago some of the motorists on this
very NG were congratulating themselves on their efforts to offset or
neutralise their massive carbon footprints by planting trees, paying
people to plant trees for them, paying organisations in third world
countries to pollute less and other greenwash hogwash. Virtually all
of which has subsequently been exposed for the profiteering scams that
they are and which make no contribution to cutting atmospheric CO2 in
the long term.

On 15 Sep, 08:24, Doug riseup.net> wrote:

You recall wrongly. I don't remember anyone ever saying that. Feel
free to provide links to instances where people did say that, however.

Doug wrote:

Indeed, there are posters who are sufficiently fortunate to have land
available on which to grow plants. Not everyone is forced to live so close
to their neighbour that they can see them wiping their arse.