Thanks for your reply. I mostly agree with many of the things you say, but I still think work to reduce the amount of emission rights should at least be on the list of high-impact things to do, and as far as I’m concerned, significantly higher than a few other paths mentioned here.
If you’d still want to do technology-specific work, I think offshore solar might also be impactful and neglected.
I think the list here is optimized for engineers, i.e. people with backgrounds that are better at working on technology than lobbying, so this is likely the proximate reason it is not on the list (I had no input on the list).
That said, whether working on emissions rights is a top priority after the recent reforms is a question that would require more work (I think it is plausible to say we are close to having maxed out on ambition, and also changes in emissions rights are primarily driven by changes in general climate policy support, it seems).
Thanks for your reply. I mostly agree with many of the things you say, but I still think work to reduce the amount of emission rights should at least be on the list of high-impact things to do, and as far as I’m concerned, significantly higher than a few other paths mentioned here.
If you’d still want to do technology-specific work, I think offshore solar might also be impactful and neglected.
I think the list here is optimized for engineers, i.e. people with backgrounds that are better at working on technology than lobbying, so this is likely the proximate reason it is not on the list (I had no input on the list).
That said, whether working on emissions rights is a top priority after the recent reforms is a question that would require more work (I think it is plausible to say we are close to having maxed out on ambition, and also changes in emissions rights are primarily driven by changes in general climate policy support, it seems).