type all threads links
  rss feed

media invite with a difference

Thread started on 13/2/2007 19:52 Private

andy_ross

andy_ross

Below is an invitation we have received in the website mail box. Please feel free to comment. I have posted below my own initial response to Wendy.

Andy

Wendy Barnaby sent a message using the contact form at
http://www.carbonrationing.org.uk/contact.

Dear CRAGs,

I edit Science & Public Affairs, the magazine published by the British Association for the Advancement of Science (see http://www.the-ba.net/spa). It goes to science policy-makers in government, Parliament, higher education and industry, as well as to the
members of the BA. It is available free of charge to anyone who registers for it at http://www.the-ba.net/register.

In each issue of the magazine we have what we call a spat – an email debate between two people. I’m wondering whether you would like to take part in the next one, please.

The provisional title of the topic is: Carbon trading: a valuable way of cutting carbon emissions?. I see from your website that you are enthusiastic about emissions trading. I’m asking Rising Tide (http://risingtide.org.uk) if they’d like to argue that carbon trading is not valuable.

The mechanics are that each person sends emails to the other. Each writes three pieces, each of 200 words. Each person has three working days for each piece. We print the resulting exchange over a double page in the magazine (you can see one at the magazine’s website in the list of contents under SPATalk).

As to the timing: the spat would have to be finished by 5 April, so we could do it even if we didn’t start until mid-March. We certainly have time to take account of participants prior commitments.

Please would you let me know whether you would like to be in it, in principle, and we could have a chat about it. I do hope you will. The issue is important and our readers would be fascinated.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

Wendy Barnaby

Andy's initial reply

andy_ross

andy_ross

Thanks for the invite, Wendy.

I will post it on the website to see what people think.

http://www.carbonrationing.org.uk/fora/threads/media-invite-with-a-diffe…

Unlike Rising Tide we do not have a clear and agreed position on “emissions trading”.

http://risingtide.org.uk/about/political

So it may not be appropriate for one CRAGger to attempt to speak for the whole network on this potentially emotive issue.

What we certainly have in common with Rising Tide is our concern to help promote the cause of climate justice.

best wishes

Andy

PS. I have copied George Marshall in on this email as he was a founder of Rising Tide and now runs COIN

http://coinet.org.uk/

an organisation which helped with the formation of the Oxford CRAG.
I would welcome George’s thoughts on the usefulness of our participation
in such a “spat”.

 

What on earth is climate

robinsmith3

robinsmith3

What on earth is climate justice. We’re not promoting this yet, and dont know what it is except more jargon

Lets start using language that will encourage not confuse new membership from outside the envrionmental community please

Brgds
R

 

I agree. That term is a

david

david

I agree. That term is a poorly defined umbrella term. It’s best to talk about equitable carbon allowances, or aid to mitigate climatic damages. “Climate justice” could mean anything to anyone.

 

Could you not spat on just personal carbon trading?

sleepynick

Hi Andy,

I think it would be worth clarifying whether the discussion can be restricted to just personal carbon trading or includes emissions from business, such as those associated with the current and much maligned EU trading sheme.

As you hinted, it might not be appropriate for a representative of the network to defend business emission trading as this does not directly relate to CRAGs- Would you even want to?

Maybe Wendy would consider restricting the debate to just personal carbon trading, but then If so Rising Tide would not necessarily be able to argue against such a concept with the same conviction as that against business emission trading, as their ideological position seems to be against business-led solutions.

All the best,
Nick

 

Sorry if this is going a bit

robinsmith3

robinsmith3

Sorry if this is going a bit off topic, but what is Rising Tide’s position exactly. Can anyone put it into one sentence. And then what solution do they suggest. Its a debate worth having because the case for growth with adequate reductions is by no means straight forward just yet, though I support it fully of course!

 

contraction and convergence

john ackers

john ackers

contraction and convergence without trading

 

Rising Tide's position

 

I'd be amazed if those

robinsmith3

robinsmith3

I’d be amazed if those Rising Tide claims to be supporting would actually agree with their approach. They also omit tribes, culture and religion from the blame for some reason. Seems like yet another organisation attempting to divide rather than unite on the climate solution as a means to a hidden end. Not to mention some disgraceful misinformation about Kyoto. What a shame but not suprised

 

consider restricting the debate to just personal carbon trading

john ackers

john ackers

good idea. The EU ETS is a very complex scheme about which we have relatively little expertise.

 

Let's decide

john ackers

john ackers

I think that we should go ahead with this as long as long as we agree that it is clear that each side will be expressing personal views (think this is the normal situation) and that each response is posted here first for comment.

I am happy to take on the subject as it is “Carbon trading: a valuable way of cutting carbon emissions?”. But I am equally happy for others to volunteer.

Does anyone actually object to us participating?

 

Fine by me

Guy S

Guy S

Don’t see why we shouldn’t participate, and add some clarity to the debate. I’m sure they’ll be reasonable, and if they’re not, then we’ll take them on with reasonable arguments! :)

 

George Marshall's thoughts

andy_ross

andy_ross

I am sure George will not mind me posting his email to website mailbox here:

Dear Wendy,

In a spat I would strongly recommend Larry Lohmann, former assistant editor of the Ecologist and a highly thoughtful and creative critic of emissions trading. An alternative is Adam Ma’anit an editor of New Internationalist and also a long time critic.

It is harder to find someone to talk for emissions trading. The best communicators are from the offset companies (we did a debate last year on between Mike Mason of Climate Care and Larry. Mike is a strong and powerful spokesman) but I feel that this often gets bogged down in the issues of personal offsets which I believe are a lesser issue. The real problem is the theory of using market mechanisms as a way to achieve a national/intenational transition. But I daresay Larry can recommend an advocate of the theory.

Yours

George

 

CRAGs is an experiment

andy_ross

andy_ross

CRAGs is an experiment. Part of the reason we are doing this is to explore whether an annual carbon budget and penalty (and reward) can help us radically reduce our emissions and whether it can do so in a way that does not disadvantage the less well-off among us. This is by no means a given. For this reason, I would not personally want to take part in a spat. But I will not block anyone that does.

Andy