Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

sanjsrik t1_ivuun9g wrote

How are companies meant to know this? Can't they just make up whatever they want?

14

Artesian OP t1_ivuv5vs wrote

Running carbon accounting for their various projects is something that absolutely is already on the radar for many companies. Life cycle assessments are one tool used for exactly this purpose.

The government can then pick and choose vendors for various projects based on who is most sustainable / environmentally responsible. And they already do some of this, but not nearly enough.

16

GFere t1_ivwldk0 wrote

won't this make contracts more expensive?

8

MoiMagnus t1_ivxk9di wrote

Yes, but that's kind of unavoidable. Regulations make things more expensive.

On the other hand, if those regulations are actually effective (which I don't have the expertise to judge) and, for example, manage to delay by a little bit some negative climate effects, then it can still be cost-effective.

Climate change and pollution are expensive to the society. From increased natural disasters to public health issues, or disruption to international diplomacy (hence military costs), we always pay for it one way or another.

(It's just that it's difficult to make the actual computations, since the pollution from a single public contract is quite negligible compared to total human pollution, but the increase in costs is also quite negligible compared to the total cost of climate change)

4

dabe7125 t1_ivvxdhi wrote

If the US really cared about the climate like they say they do they’d put a stop to the fossil fuel industry and all of the subsidies they receive rather than make companies come up with some report

2

johnn48 t1_ivwxfrd wrote

In the light of election results, all reporting should come with a caveat “subject to Congressional approval” or “by unilateral Executive Action”. Too often we hear of pending legislation and it’s blocked in the Senate or House or fail’s to get out of Committee. We live in a time of unequalled partisan obstructionism by Congress.

2

AutoModerator t1_ivud8hr wrote

Reminder: this subreddit is meant to be a place free of excessive cynicism, negativity and bitterness. Toxic attitudes are not welcome here.

All Negative comments will be removed and will possibly result in a ban.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

1

Ineludible_Ruin t1_ivwrfw0 wrote

I can't wait for the price of everything to skyrocket so that these companies are forced to do this! It's so exciting!

0

WoodenPicklePoo t1_ivwah2d wrote

This is not uplifting news, this just sounds like it will make everything even more expensive.

−2

Android_304 t1_ivwoxxe wrote

It's a rule proposed, it's not legislation.

Hopefully we can block this rule from being implemented

−4

Hot_Egg5840 t1_ivv161v wrote

Just one more step before citizens need to assess their impact or ... No tax refund, no gov services, no food,...

−11

PM_ME_YUR_BIG_SECRET t1_ivvwgxs wrote

The fuck are you talking about?

9

Hot_Egg5840 t1_ivw7rjn wrote

Do you think it will stop with contractors? It will go after big business, then small, then consumers (citizens).... No different than "papers please .."

−6

CamelSpotting t1_ivwhh8j wrote

If businesses are complying then consumers pretty much have to. But really what is the problem with paying for the resources you use? Why is stealing from others free?

6

Hot_Egg5840 t1_ivxoavp wrote

First off, this is coming from the exec branch; legislation should only come from Congress. Second, this is only adding "paperwork" to the burden off business; there is no value added. Third, the data will most certainly be misused for punitive reasons regardless of truth or good intent.

−1