Brad Ideas - What a great idea - Comments

Credits

brad — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 23:50:46 -0800

The credits for store purchases would be so cheap as to be pretty meaningless. At the pump or in the home heating and electric bill it would be a different story.

Of course in mandatory credit schemes, buying them is not an option, you can't burn the fuel at all without credits. Usually these get applied to the big vendors who then pass on the cost.

It's 113 gallons to a tonne of CO2, or 8.8kg per gallon. At the Euro price that's 10 cents per gallon ($11/tonne) and with a 20% markup that's closer to $2 on a 15 gallon ($50) fillup, which I could see people doing. Of course with so much demand the price would go up, as it should. And there would need to be more regulations to stop scamming by sellers.

Optional carbon credits at the pump and retail stores

micah — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 22:48:42 -0800

Okay, so Delta airlines is allowing individuals the option to purchase credits to offset the carbon emissions from their flights. So far it has be popular. Why not expand this into everyday life. Example: one gallon of gas results in the same amount of co2 regardless of the car that burns it right? then at the pump, instead of asking if I want to buy a car wash, ask if I want to offset the CO2 from my fill up today for X cost. In most cases it would be less than a dollar. The station can take a 20% markup (regulated) and the rest buys credits off the climate exchange. This would funnel tens of millions to green energy development. It also means that I can drive my hummer guilt free and dont need to find biofuels.

The same can be done at checkout counters of say wholefoods. Johnson and Johnson could easily calculate the carbon emmission released while making some shampoo. Give that info per item to the big box retailers, link it to the barcode. Then at the end of the purchase ask the customer if that want to offset the carbon for an additional X dollars. It will be added immediately at the point of purchase, retailer takes their 20% and the average cost would be under a buck. I would do it everytime for say 30 cents each visit. Why not? its just 30 cents...

Please post feedback! Thanks mlandis@charityh2o.org

No, it should be ourcarbonnation.com

brad — Thu, 15 Nov 2007 20:54:00 -0800

My point was you should not just correct the URL here. Instead, just make "ourcarbonnation.com" do a redirectperm to www.whatever so people can type in both.

And switch to a better hosting company, that's the quick way to make it fast. Then, improve the code and go to a cheaper hosting company when you're done.

Woops yes it should

Our Carbon Nation — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 05:49:18 -0800

Woops yes it should obviously be http://www.ourcarbonnation.com. Thank you for taking the time to look at the site. We are aware the site can be a little slow and are in the process of resolving this issue.

Regards
Our Carbon Nation

Good idea

brad — Mon, 05 Nov 2007 11:05:58 -0800

But you don't have anything at ourcarbonnation.com without a www in front, so you should fix that. And it's a very slow, over-animated web site, and produces PDFs at the end which makes no sense. Did I mention slow?

The Carbon Offset Directory

Our Carbon Nation — Mon, 05 Nov 2007 06:30:30 -0800

If you wish to review the different Offset Providers have a look at http://ourcarbonnation.com
We hold information on price per tonne, administration costs and how projects are verified. We are constantly striving to increase transparency in the offset market and have the support of over 40 providers. Have a look and let us know what you think.
Our Carbon Nation Team

Calculating tip

brad — Sun, 04 Nov 2007 09:10:56 -0800

As I outlined it, the banker must declare what the tip shall be (or perhaps declare tax + tip since most people will remember the menu-prices of their items) and the table gets a chance to argue it up or down, but one it is set, the expectation should be that any fair payer must not stint on this. Though I would have thought you could allow people to go up or down from a base tip.

Now, if your declaration that it doesn't work (in your situation) is true, then the banker is indeed taking a risk, and so having the rare profit go to the banker does not seem unfair, if they're taking the more common loss. But yes, the system is that the banker is the one person who doesn't calculate what they owe. They just pay what it say son the bill, plus the tip they declared, and don't count the money or calculate their own meal. That is the reward/punishment for being banker.

In Hong Kong

brad — Sun, 04 Nov 2007 09:07:32 -0800

Curious. When I visited Hong Kong, and found I could not find the good restaurants, I took to calling up people I knew barely (such as people on my customer lists) to ask them to lunch. I intended to pay (and the custom in much of the world is that if a vendor invites a customer to lunch, the vendor always pays, though of course the customer is paying indirectly.) I did this only so they would direct me to good places to eat, and for some company, and that part worked -- but to my embarrassment they insisted on paying, saying they were the hosts and I was the visitor to their town.

Tried it many times. Never

Anonymous — Sat, 03 Nov 2007 21:36:30 -0700

Tried it many times. Never worked a single time.

Everybody appreciates service differently. Some will tip. The banker usually sees a profit for himself instead of the person who earned it, and refuses (even as acknowledged in your post and again in several of the comments) to contribute on an equal footing (i.e. refusing to put in what they think they themselves owe, even if the bank is "over" what they personally think the waitress deserves).

Sure, if everyone in the group are jerks, it can work. Otherwise, it's doomed to misdirect funds away from the one who earned them.

In China the richest person pays for everything

Martin — Sat, 03 Nov 2007 07:20:21 -0700

Or more accurately, whoever issued the invitation pays for everything. This solves any problems dividing up the bill.

It also makes for some interesting dynamics as diners compete to pay the bill.

In work situations, the manager puts the bill on their corporate credit card.

Works in Oz, mostly

Moz — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 15:17:57 -0700

I regularly hang out with people who have widely disparate incomes (meals after Critical Mass especially, combo of geeks and students) and the banker system works pretty well in that situation. Although we normally call it "the donation tin". We bulk order and accept donations, and the extra goes into the donation tin for next time or "other things" (Critical Mass does "other things" quite well). A while ago we did that after mass and made ~20% of the total in "profit".

I think it's partly because we eat at cheap places, and partly because there are enough geeks to cover the shortfall. It only takes ~10% of the people to pay 50% over the actual and you're square. This also covers the small change problem - few people are capable of both adding up what they ate and finding exactly $7.65 in their wallet, but for the banker that missing .15 or .65 adds up over 20 people. Plus here we don't have the hidden fee nonsense that you have to put up with, so people have a better idea of what they've "spent". We do have a degree of haggling ability though, and I gather that's also rare in the US. "haggling" and "asking for a discount" depending on whether you're asian or anglo. So if we get $220 worth of food but I only get $200 from the group I will often say "group order, how about a discount"... sometimes I get it. Other times, we just get a deal automatically, like ordering 30 pizzas for pickup at 7:30pm on a Friday (after Mass) we get the "Tuesday lunchtime special price".

I suspect you're also used to much more expensive meals than I am, which does change the dynamic. I'm quite willing to pay $200-odd in the expectation of getting it back but it's no great risk to me personally if I don't. But if that was $2000 I'd be much more reluctant to take the risk. I think partly because I associate that with much bigger gatherings where there are less direct personal links. I just can't imagine paying over $100 a head for a meal...

It's a matter of

Charles Merriam — Thu, 01 Nov 2007 09:51:14 -0700

It's a matter of wealth.

I've found that being banker in the "dont-count-it" method is to my great advantage when I'm having a meal with a group of people who consider themselves well off. People employ the 'Yuppie Dining Coupon' method is employed even at a light lunch. On the other hand, folks who are a bit more desperate tend to scrimp. Folks who game the system too often are snubbed.

If one cares about the money, I guess one could pick the method for the crowd.

Poorest person?

brad — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:06:16 -0700

I'm not clear. Why would somebody of low income agree to pay for an entire expensive meal, just to get out of a 1/N share of a lesser meal? I can't see that ever making sense. Or are they agreeing only to pay 2/(N-1) at the next meal? That would make sense for somebody who is just a little short one week.

We don't seem to have the problem with people being short of cash because the restaurants mostly will take more than one credit card in a pinch, and the latest innovation is that you ask somebody to cover you, and you paypal them the money when you get home. Or even from your cell phone. (Paypal's original business plan involved payments from PDAs in fact.)

I've used the banker system

Christina — Wed, 31 Oct 2007 13:40:29 -0700

I've used the banker system many times with friends, here in the US, and it works fine. there is also the method of One Person Treats, basically meaning that the poorest person backs out of paying with the promise that they will cover everyone for the next meal. Generally this next meal turns out to be very expensive, so this method keeps everyone in line with the not paying. since we are all good friends (or equal bastards, i'm not sure which) it all works out in the end.

That's true

brad — Tue, 30 Oct 2007 13:07:08 -0700

Although everybody has a calculator with them in their cell phone these days, but at least for now most would not know how to get to it. I did find in Australia, where the price shown on the menu is the price you will pay, with tipping uncommon and tax included, that there was indeed sticker shock, especially combined with the cheaper dollars. An item that is $10 in the USA might say $20 in Australia. And while you know it's the same, if you go by a restaurant and the menu shows all the main dishes are $40 it's hard to break the programming that says "this is a fancy restaurant, only go in if seeking such."