Technology in Perspective 11.18.23 | Carbon credits and removal
Who deserves credit for the environmental contributions associated with green products like electric vehicles: the person who buys a $75,000 electric pickup or an $800 charger, or the company that manufactures and sells those products? And if those benefits can be quantified, should they be purchased by individuals or businesses hoping to cancel out their own ongoing greenhouse-gas pollution?
Plus, subscribe & save 25% for full access to MIT Technology Review's latest magazine edition on Hard Problems — it's all about society's most urgent issues, and how we should tackle them.
The popular EV truck startup's move raises questions about who really owns the climate contributions from clean technologies—and whether they should be used to offset someone else's pollution.
The rules approved at the COP26 climate conference include major loopholes, and could spur the creation of questionable carbon credits in other markets.
A Silicon Valley startup wants to supercharge trees to soak up more carbon and cool the climate. Is this the great climate solution or a whole lot of hype?
Kodama has raised more than $6 million from Bill Gates' climate fund and other investors, as it pursues new ways to reduce wildfire risks and lock away carbon in harvested trees.
The startup used plant matter and bio-oil to sequester thousands of tons of carbon. The question now is how reliable, scalable, and economical this approach will prove.
The Massachusetts Audubon Society has managed its land as wildlife habitat for years. Here's how the carbon credits it sold may have fueled climate change.
For a limited time, save 25% on an annual subscription to MIT Technology Review and gain access to our Hard Problems edition, which explores technology's role in solving the world's most pressing issues.
Comments
Post a Comment