InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 2
Posts 794
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 04/10/2008

Re: arbpro post# 11376

Thursday, 07/31/2014 3:34:53 PM

Thursday, July 31, 2014 3:34:53 PM

Post# of 13573
I'm just trying to kick up some dialogue and encourage patience while we wait.

Totally agreed on methodology/ideology of folks who drive this CC movement and also convenient application of their "principles" - which is not at all a digression IMO.

I'm suggesting Gold Standard review periods might be more reasonable than some of the other hoops in the application process. Review periods could really help reduce project shutdowns, lawsuits, or delays by bureaucrats or irate neighbors who would otherwise come into the process after credits are issued and traded. Such a scenario would be a royal mess - especially if you're the guy holding the credit at the time, or a fertilizer company whose chief competitor gets his cousin Mary who's married to the head of zoning to shut you down. Thus investors can have more confidence on project viability & sustainability and be willing to pay more per credit - we figured previously that GS was 6x more per credit! So these hoops are a major hassle but have commensurate dollar value - no?

That being said, I'm not minimizing at all the effort GEC Org folks are putting into compliance, as some of the local review hoops I saw in the app. are major overkill.