Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Frank Hovis

Fake Market Faked Further

Recommended Posts

We're paying for this nonsense :angry:

If you have a market not founded in reality then of course it will be subject to fraud.

European carbon market suspended over fraud fears

The European carbon market has been thrown into turmoil after the scandal-hit scheme was suspended for a week over suspicions of fraud.

Steam and smoke pour from power station chimney stacks into the cold and wet morning skies near Watlington, east of London

Companies need permits to emit carbon dioxide, and polluters are granted a certain number of emissions allowances that can be traded

By Rowena Mason 6:38PM GMT 19 Jan 2011

More than €2bn (£1.7bn) of trade is likely to be disrupted after the European Commission said it would prevent transactions until January 26.

The suspension follows allegations that 475,000 carbon credits worth €7m were stolen in a hacking attack on the Czech carbon register. It appears that the intangible allowances were bounced between eastern European countries before disappearing without a trace.

France's Bluenext exchange was the first to close its platform, while Austria, Poland, Estonia and Greece also shut their registries for trade.

This is not the first challenge to the credibility of the €90bn annual market in carbon allowances

Under the flagship scheme, companies need permits to emit carbon dioxide as part of the global fight against climate change and polluters are granted a certain number of emissions allowances that can be traded.

But it has been plagued by fraud, with Europol estimating that carbon trading criminals trying to play the system may have accounted for up to 90pc of all market activity in some European countries during 2009. Fraudulent traders mainly from Britain, France, Spain, Denmark and Holland pocketed an estimated €5bn. Carbon allowances are particularly susceptible to fraud because they are high value, intangible and easily moved between different countries.

The Commission said on Wednesday it "will work to ensure that this transitional measure can be lifted swiftly for all those registries with adequate security measures".

Kjersti Ulset, manager for the European carbon market at Point Carbon, said: "Hacking attacks of this type have also occurred elsewhere within the European Union in the recent past.

"Although such incidents are negligible in terms of actual market impact, they will over time undermine the credibility of carbon trading as a policy measure to reduce emissions in Europe. Immediate actions to improve the security of EU registries are thus needed."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/8269907/European-carbon-market-suspended-over-fraud-fears.html

Edited by Frank Hovis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fraudulent traders mainly from Britain, France, Spain, Denmark and Holland pocketed an estimated €5bn.

So who could possible organise this and get away with it organised crime or just the banks?

Is investing in this a good idea then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's just another facet of the financial madness of the last few years! :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

best way to halt carbon emmissions is to stop digging the stuff out of the ground..no fraud, no fiddling, just no availabilty and physical limitations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The scheme is just another way thought up by our masters of transferring wealth from East to West. The Bankers go along with it as they get to cream their bit off the top.....

All based upon the fallacy that is global warming climate change.

The lie and deceit has become so embedded now that some VI's were even beginning to blame the recent floods in Queensland upon it.

It was widely reported the flood level peaked 10feet below what it did just over 100 years ago when there were practically no emmisions as opposed to today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're paying for this nonsense :angry:

If you have a market not founded in reality then of course it will be subject to fraud.

....

Fraudulent trading in things disconnected from reality (whatever that is) is the basis of the last 100 years of capitalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The scheme is just another way thought up by our masters of transferring wealth from East to West. The Bankers go along with it as they get to cream their bit off the top.....

I thought the plan was to transfer wealth from West to East?

I'm confused now. unsure.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the plan was to transfer wealth from West to East?

I'm confused now. unsure.gif

The east (and far east) makes stuff for the west these days, so they pollute on our behalf... tax pollution and it mainly hurts your producers, not you. The price of produced goods may increase but it is the consumer who pays for it anyway, so in a way it is another stealth tax I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've long thought carbon trading was just window dressing. The message it gives is the wrong one, i.e. that it's OK to pullute if you pay for it. A bit like in the catholic church where it's OK to commit sins if you confess them to the priest (I'm an atheist by the way!)

It's a pity that all this CO2 emissions hoo-haa and the global warming / climate change lobby has masked the real environmental issue facing us.

The plain fact is that we're using up the world's finite resources at an ever increasing rate. Known world reserves of oil, natural gas and even uranium for nuclear power stations are measured in decades, only coal reserves are quoted in centuries. That's why we need to be moving to renewables now, so that the transition is gradual and the reserves of finite resources can be made to last longer.

Edited by Hyperduck Quack Quack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wind power is the same there has been no reduction in carbon emissions since it has been introduced, not even in the environmental darling country of Denmark.
Carbon Dioxide emissions, not carbon emissions! If emissions were just 'carbon' we'd have invented free, limitless energy :D

Wind turbines don't produce any CO2 emissions, so if Denmark's overall emissions haven't gone down, the their overall energy consumption must have gone up.

Edited by Hyperduck Quack Quack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant imagine for a moment renewable energy providing enough power to replace hydrocarbon and nuclear. But then again I dont think we need to be that worried about it either.

It could be done. It would be a huge task. A Severn barrage could produce 7% of all Britain's electricity. A Morecambe Bay barrage almost as much again. Offshore windfarms far out in the shallow parts of the North Sea like the Dogger Bank could produce a significant proportion of our electricity - 30%-50%. OK, it would need thousands of 2 MW turbines, but, hey, we built oil and gas rigs to get fuel from beneath the North Sea, and undersea pipelines to bring it ashore, we built the railways over 150 years ago, 300 years ago we drained the fens to make agricutural land - so offshore wind farms are do-able. Then there're rooftop solar PV. That works, although rooftop 'small wind' is not a go-er unless you like in a very windy place.

Edited by Hyperduck Quack Quack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The scheme is just another way thought up by our masters of transferring wealth from East to West. The Bankers go along with it as they get to cream their bit off the top.....

All based upon the fallacy that is global warming climate change.

The lie and deceit has become so embedded now that some VI's were even beginning to blame the recent floods in Queensland upon it.

It was widely reported the flood level peaked 10feet below what it did just over 100 years ago when there were practically no emmisions as opposed to today.

Damn it!! I never thought I'd see Climate change / Global warming being bashed on here too. You may be fed up of people banging on about it, but I'm in the opposite camp. I admit that the widely reported fact that global warming was dreamt up a while back to push a political agenda, but it doesn't change the facts. Regardless of whether we are contributing to it, the world is warming up, FAST! The increased CO2 in the atmosphere is not going to slow this down, only make it worse, this is a fact. If the ice caps melt, most of the worlds major cities will be under water, this is also a fact. So please tell me why this isn't a huge problem!

As for the floods, more extreme climate is a sign of the current equilibrium state of the global climate being pushed closer and closer to reaching a new equilibrium. You can think of the climate (or any system in fact) as being like a bumpy surface or landscape, with the current state of that system occupying a point on that surface. We're currently in a trough in this surface somewhere and the peaks or ridges can be thought of as more extreme and unlikely conditions. We are gradually pushing ourselves more and more up this surface until one day, it will be pushed over and the climate will start moving towards a new equilibrium, probably very quickly. Nobody will be able to predict with much accuracy where this will be, but it could be very bad indeed.

This is also happening with the current financial system. Although it is a very different system, when the equilibrium state shifts, it will be sudden, a crash if you will. Since you're on HPC I think you can appreciate how the VI's will do anything to spread disinformation to further their own agendas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even enviro-loons like fluffy666 can't possibly think carbon trading is a good idea.

Just another roulette table for the banksters and wall street types to gamble away the prosperity of nations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... So please tell me why this isn't a huge problem! ...

Because the scientist have said it will be places like Bangladesh that flood not America so no one cares.

Because the scientists have said it will not be a disaster for 20 years or more so all the old people can carry on driving their big campervans round Europe knowing it will not affect them.

Because the markets will find an answer for it.

Because they won't let it happen.

Because somebody will do something about it before then.

Because its not my problem as no one else is doing anything.

Because its China's fault and there's nothing we can do.

Because I read on a blog that it isn't true.

Because Sarah Palin said it isn't true.

Because aliens will rescue us.

Because its part of god's plan.

Because the world is about to end anyway and Jesus is coming back to kill all the Muslims.

Because as long as I have my assault rifle I will be okay.

Because I hate my children anyway.

Because Strictly is on and I can't be bothered.

Because you can't believe anything you read in the newspapers.

Because you can't believe anything you read on the internet.

I'm sure there are some more to come but that should save about 40 posts :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The lie and deceit has become so embedded now that some VI's were even beginning to blame the recent floods in Queensland upon it.

It was widely reported the flood level peaked 10feet below what it did just over 100 years ago when there were practically no emmisions as opposed to today.

The crazy greens leader Bob Brown? Even labor goons were hushing him after he said the coal miners should cough up the 20-30 billion required because they caused climate change which caused this disaster.Personally i think they should never have allowed people to build on those floodplains and they should have built more dams (Which was rejected by Greens & Labor because they thought climate change would mean less rainfall and mass rain events would never happen again - these people often think in linear terms instead of thinking the climate is constantly changing through NATURAL causes.How much was the new Queensland desal plant pumping out when Wivenhoe was at 180% capacity including flood mitigation? I don't care what anyone else says Bligh is a ******ing moron.)

Also i have been hearing about Gillard wanting to bring in something called a 'flood levy'.Gillard has a hard on for bringing in new taxes it seems , she has tried to bring in the mining tax , the carbon trading con and now this new flood levy.That flood levy will be like income tax , once it gets in it will never go.It will stay and Gillards reasoning will be 'We need to continue using the flood levy to create a slush fund for future floods' , but there will never be a slush fund as the money will just be spent in one of Labors black holes.

Edited by Ruffneck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite our experiences here, globally 2010 was the warmest year on record. Something like six of the ten warmest years of the last century and a half were in the last decade.

I did a school project in 1990 about what was then called global warming (and has been renamed climate change since some parts of the world, including the UK, may end up colder). Every single thing I learned then has pretty much come to pass. The evidence is all around us. Sure, there are one-off events that seem to go against a trend, but if your team loses a single game, doesn't mean they can't go on and win the league.

Folk planning to retire in places like Spain are going to find that within 20 years the summer climate there may be more uncomfortable than they imagined. At the same time, oil tankers are now charting routes across the North Pole that were once completely unpassable due to ice (that is irony) and Greenland's formerly non-existent agricultural produce is getting larger each harvest...

Edited by rantnrave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite our experiences here, globally 2010 was the warmest year on record. Something like six of the ten warmest years of the last century and a half were in the last decade.

I did a school project in 1990 about what was then called global warming (and has been renamed climate change since some parts of the world, including the UK, may end up colder). Every single thing I learned then has pretty much come to pass. The evidence is all around us. Sure, there are one-off events that seem to go against a trend, but if your team loses a single game, doesn't mean they can't go on and win the league.

Folk planning to retire in places like Spain are going to find that within 20 years the summer climate there may be more uncomfortable than they imagined. At the same time, oil tankers are now charting routes across the North Pole that were once completely unpassable due to ice (that is irony) and Greenland's formerly non-existent agricultural produce is getting larger each harvest...

Even Phil Jones admits there has been no warming since 1998.

Whats with all the lefty tree huggers on this site nowdays?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even Phil Jones admits there has been no warming since 1998.

Whats with all the lefty tree huggers on this site nowdays?

Hands up in ignorance... Who is Phil Jones? Does he think ice caps retreating in size is mere coincidence???

I think the term tree-hugger would refer to people advocating action, which I wasn't in my previous post???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Wednesday's Independent:

Last year tied with 2005 as the warmest year on record for global surface temperature, US government scientists said in a report on Wednesday that offered the latest data on climate change.

The Earth in 2010 experienced temperatures higher than the 20th century average for the 34th year in a row, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said.

Overall, 2010 and 2005 were 1.12 degrees Fahrenheit (0.62 Celsius) above the 20th century average when taking a combination of land and water surface temperatures across the world, it said.

Those two years were also the highest in temperature since record-keeping began in 1880.

"If the warming trend continues, as is expected, if greenhouse gases continue to increase, the 2010 record will not stand for long," said James Hansen, the director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS).

Last year was the wettest on record, NOAA said citing Global Historical Climatology Network which made the calculation based on global average precipitation, even though regional patterns varied widely.

When it came to hurricanes and storms, the Pacific Ocean saw the fewest number of hurricanes and named storms, three and seven respectively, since the 1960s.

But the Atlantic Ocean told a different story, with 12 hurricanes and 19 named storms, which include tropical storms and depressions, marking the second highest number of hurricanes on record and third highest for storms.

The analysis also tracked weather changes that contributed to massive floods in Pakistan and a heat wave in Russia, saying an "unusually strong jet stream" from June to August was to blame.

"The jet stream remained locked in place for weeks, bringing an unprecedented two-month heat wave to Russia and contributing to devastating floods in Pakistan at the end of July," it said.

Expert Bob Ward at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at London School of Economics and Political Science said the US data shows proof of climate change.

"These new figures show unequivocally that the Earth is warming and its temperature is at record levels," Ward said.

Last year's data "also showed that the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere had reached 390 parts per million, its highest level for at least 800,000 years and almost 40 per cent higher than the level before the start of the Industrial Revolution when humans started to burn fossil fuels in increasing amounts," he said.

"The evidence is overwhelming that human activities are driving climate change."

In the United States alone, 2010 marked the 14th year in a row with higher annual average temperatures when compared to the long term average since 1895, NOAA said.

Record snowfalls at the start of the year in the northeast including Washington and Philadelphia were part of a winter pattern driven by El Nino and the Arctic Oscillation, NOAA said.

A separate report by Canada's Environment Ministry said that last year was the warmest in Canada since it began keeping meteorological records 63 years ago.

NASA analysts said the shrinking sea ice in the Arctic may have made winters in Europe and Canada warmer than usual.

"Winter weather patterns are notoriously chaotic, and the GISS analysis finds seven of the last 10 European winters warmer than the average from 1951 to 1980," NASA said in a statement.

"The unusual cold in the past two winters has caused scientists to begin to speculate about a potential connection to sea ice changes," it said.

"Arctic sea ice acts like a blanket, insulating the atmosphere from the ocean's heat. Take away that blanket, and the heat can escape into the atmosphere, increasing local surface temperatures. Regions in northeast Canada were more than 18 degrees (F) warmer than normal in December.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wind turbines cannot be relied upon and if you build one you will need to build another back up whichare mostly done by hydrocarbon resources.
I don't think even those who support offshore windpower (like myself) claim that it will perform to its maximum all the time, because of the variability of the wind. It's the saving in the amount of time that gas-fired and other rapid response power stations need to be fired up that's significant.

The argument about wind turbines has moved on somewhat from the idea of dotting single 2-3 MW turbines around the countryside to having large far-offshore windfarms, the development of some is already under way. Out at sea the wind blows more steadily and turbines will be working effectively for most of the time, with a good proportion of that time being at or near maximum output because the blades have controllable pitch.

Re global warming. I'm a sceptic, variable as the year-by-year temperture statistics mount up. They've just announced that 2010 was the joint hottest year on record with 1998. During the 1990's global temperature went up in line with global CO2 enissions, which tallied with the known theory about CO2 and the greenhouse effect. Since 2000 the temperature statistics have not shown any real trend, so my scepticism has gone up. Last years' figure, just out, reduces my scepticism a little.

Edited by Hyperduck Quack Quack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think even those who support offshore windpower (like myself) claim that it will perform to its maximum all the time, because of the variability of the wind. It's the saving in the amount of time that gas-fired and other rapid response power stations need to be fired up that's significant.

The argument about wind turbines has moved on somewhat from the idea of dotting single 2-3 MW turbines around the countryside to having large far-offshore windfarms, the development of some is already under way. Out at sea the wind blows more steadily and turbines will be working effectively for most of the time, with a good proportion of that time being at or near maximum output because the blades have controllable pitch.

Re global warming. I'm a sceptic, variable as the year-by-year temperture statistics mount up. They've just announced that 2010 was the joint hottest year on record with 1998. During the 1990's global temperature went up in line with global CO2 enissions, which tallied with the known theory about CO2 and the greenhouse effect. Since 2000 the temperature statistics have not shown any real trend, so my scepticism has gone up. Last years' figure, just out, reduces my scepticism a little.

I too have variable wind and this leads to fluctuating carbon @rseprint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It could be done. It would be a huge task. A Severn barrage could produce 7% of all Britain's electricity. A Morecambe Bay barrage almost as much again. Offshore windfarms far out in the shallow parts of the North Sea like the Dogger Bank could produce a significant proportion of our electricity - 30%-50%. OK, it would need thousands of 2 MW turbines, but, hey, we built oil and gas rigs to get fuel from beneath the North Sea, and undersea pipelines to bring it ashore, we built the railways over 150 years ago, 300 years ago we drained the fens to make agricutural land - so offshore wind farms are do-able. Then there're rooftop solar PV. That works, although rooftop 'small wind' is not a go-er unless you like in a very windy place.

You need something like tidal though. During the recent big freeze, Britains wind farms hardly produced a jot of energy as extreme cold is often accompanied by zero wind, and I could see all of East Yorkshires coal powered stations, going full blast to keep pace with demand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do really mean carbon dioxide (CO2) @rseprint or do you really, reeely mean a carbon @reseprint as in methane CH4 ??

Send me a bottle and I will collect some for you :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 312 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.