buy carbon credits NOW…and fuel the bubble!
The science behind climate change is a joke.. without going back too much, Danish people should know well that until the XIV century Greenland was actually GREEN LAND, after there was a significant cooling (just look at ice skater in Flemish paintings). Just looking at that for me is difficult to accept blindly that mankind is the cause of climate change

However also given for grant that carbon is the cause of climate change: the current policy will change nothing

Scientists tell us that WHAT MATTER is the concentration of Co2 in the atmosphere.. to reduce this concentration we should emit less Co2 than what the whole system is able to absorb. The truth is that “the system” is able to absorb very little … also a Co2 reduction of -50% overnight would not be sufficient to reduce the concentration

SO, IF THE CAUSE IS CO2 IT WILL GET WORSE AND WORSE NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS, THE ONLY WAY OUT WOULD BE A REDUCTION OF WORLD POPULATION BY HALF OR MORE.

Summing up climate change for me is a joke, but people want to invest there, politicians can get votes and it is now 5% of world GDP, so if you cancel this industry you will have double the impact of current crisis on world GDP.

WHAT TO DO? In the end what everyone wants is Co2 price to go up, so don’t bother with investing in renewables or related stuff… just buy directly Co2 today with a cheap ETF (50bps management fee and no performance fee, with daily liquidity) ou buy at 15 today , you get 30/40 in 4-5 years with a NET 15-20% annual return.

PS: for those who are afraid that the melting of the ice will increase sea levels and destroy their second home on the seaside… don’t bother, the melting of icebergs will not increase sea level, as for the principle of ARCHIMEDE: the total mass of the ocean and ice remains unchanged even when the ice melts. Just try to let melt the ice in your drink, you will see that your drink will not go up!

In the Copenhagen treaty there is a provision that kicks in when the earth’s carbon levels reach 450 part per million (we’re at 380 now). This is expected to happen in around 20 years (Why 450 was chosen is a scientific mystery). It means that once we arrive at this number, emergency action will be taken and our lives will be forced to change by law. By that time, if you have not already begun riding a horse to work, when we hit 450 you will be riding one thereafter. What is interesting is there is no provision in the treaty for the possibility of carbon levels falling. None. I find this rather revealing. If all of this is based on science, as they claim, there would be a provision included for this possibility. The whole point of this treaty is to make CO2 levels fall but there is no provision included which suggests that this could happen or what they’ll do. In other words, they will never let official CO2 levels fall.

For some people, environmentalism is collectivism in drag. Such people use environmental causes and rhetoric not to change the political climate for the purpose of environmental improvement. Rather, for them, changing the society's politics is the end, and environmental policies are mere means to that end.

The unending argument in political philosophy concerns constantly adjusting society's balance between freedom and equality. The primary goal of collectivism — of socialism in Europe and contemporary liberalism in America — is to enlarge governmental supervision of individuals' lives. This is done in the name of equality.

People are to be conscripted into one large cohort, everyone equal (although not equal in status or power to the governing class) in their status as wards of a self-aggrandizing government. Government says the constant enlargement of its supervising power is necessary for the equitable or efficient allocation of scarce resources.

Therefore, one of the collectivists' tactics is to produce scarcities, particularly of what makes modern society modern — the energy requisite for social dynamism and individual autonomy. Hence collectivists use environmentalism to advance a collectivizing energy policy. Focusing on one energy source at a time, they stress the environmental hazards of finding, developing, transporting, manufacturing or using oil, natural gas, coal or nuclear power.

Remember, Dick was wrong about health care passing and so many other issues.