Jessica Green

Jessica Green

@greenprofgreen.bsky.social

Immigrant. Poli sci prof at U of Toronto. Politics of climate change, carbon markets, oceans, NGOs, enviro politics. Author of Existential Politics, out now: tinyurl.com/ybephkfb. Occasional ranter. greenprofgreen.com

8.1K followers680 following987 posts

View full thread

1/ Some enviros / academics have been very big on voluntary standards. But this enthusiasm hasn’t withstood the test of time. Voluntary climate action is unsurprising. It works best under the threat of gov’t regulation, which is ahem, limited, these days. I made this argument 11 years ago here 👇

link.springer.comThe strength of weakness: pseudo-clubs in the climate regime - Climatic ChangeThe political utility of clubs hinges on their ability to provide excludable benefits to members. But in some cases of climate clubs, membership is not easily demarcated, and excludable benefits may b...

2/ The recent scandal abt the GHG Protocol shows another weakness of voluntary standards – they can be co-opted by industry. Indeed, the incentives for so-called “green” standard-setters to allow undue industry influence are huge – otherwise these green groups lose their followers.

newrepublic.comDid the Forestry Industry Just Get to Write Its Own Emissions Rules?Accusations of industry capture, allegedly secret working groups, and the resignations of two researchers—a scandal is rocking the world of carbon emissions accounting.

IMHO this piece vastly understates the shitshow that currently constitutes space governance. there is no functional multilateral space agreement & the US-sponsored Artemis Accords are fundamentally at odds with basic principles of int'l space law. carving up of this global commons is coming soon

nytimes.comWho Owns the Moon?A treaty from the 1960s declared that nobody can own outer space. Half a century later, billionaires and superpowers see fortunes to be made nonetheless.

Big ups to @katearonoff.bsky.social for covering this seemingly boring but actually really important story about the GHG Protocol. Standards are technical & opaque AND they’re where the politics happen. This is a classic case of “managing tons.” 🧵

newrepublic.comDid the Forestry Industry Just Get to Write Its Own Emissions Rules?Accusations of industry capture, allegedly secret working groups, and the resignations of two researchers—a scandal is rocking the world of carbon emissions accounting.
View full thread

Big ups to @katearonoff.bsky.social for covering this seemingly boring but actually really important story about the GHG Protocol. Standards are technical & opaque AND they’re where the politics happen. This is a classic case of “managing tons.” 🧵

newrepublic.comDid the Forestry Industry Just Get to Write Its Own Emissions Rules?Accusations of industry capture, allegedly secret working groups, and the resignations of two researchers—a scandal is rocking the world of carbon emissions accounting.
View full thread

3/ Why did WRI push this very questionable approach? Because private rulemakers have no authority unless someone adopts their rules. So the pressure is on WRI to ensure that the revisions were palatable to business interests.

Big ups to @katearonoff.bsky.social for covering this seemingly boring but actually really important story about the GHG Protocol. Standards are technical & opaque AND they’re where the politics happen. This is a classic case of “managing tons.” 🧵

newrepublic.comDid the Forestry Industry Just Get to Write Its Own Emissions Rules?Accusations of industry capture, allegedly secret working groups, and the resignations of two researchers—a scandal is rocking the world of carbon emissions accounting.

5/ BAD BUT UNDERSTANDABLE: Since the real problems of decarbonization are about disempowering fossil asset owners and building the political power of green asset owners, overshoot is not a problem that UNEP can really address.

3/ BAD: Says CDR is now necessary for getting back to 1.5, but ALSO says that its effects will be limited and that “guardrails” will be needed. No acknowledgement of politics or the well-known fact CDR is being touted by fossil asset owners as a way to delay decarbonization.

4/ YIKES. Notes “credibility risks” to CDR which are basically about measurement. This is what I call “managing tons” in my book, which sidesteps the REAL problem about how we manage dollars in the global economy. Credibility ain’t the issue.

Jessica Green reposted

Recommended

Jessica Green@greenprofgreen.bsky.social

@diplopolis.bsky.social review of my book is everything an excellent book review should be: concise summary with smart and reasonable critiques that promote further discussion rather than needlessly shut it down. highly recommend!

hey academics: i need help. i'm 20 yrs into my academic career. that's a lot of documents and data. my filing and back up systems are shit. crowdsourcing on: 1) what you keep from past projects and what you trash 2) how you back things up (UofT only gives you so much space) all ideas wlecome!

Jessica Green reposted

Replying to @thierryaaron.bsky.social

14/ Which brings me to @greenprofgreen.bsky.social Existential Politics. Her argument is that thirty years of counting tonnes has let us avoid the real fight, which is over who owns assets worth trillions and what happens to them. That fight is what a licensing decision is.

press.princeton.eduExistential PoliticsA new way to tackle the real politics of climate change through asset revaluation

Anyone who argues that decarbonization is “too expensive” is full of shit.

Laura Millan@lauramillan.bsky.social

The worst heat wave on record for Europe resulted in over 2,700 excess deaths in England and Wales and cost the whole of the UK $1.5 billion My story via @bloomberg.com www.bloomberg.com/news/article...