Can you buy a greener conscience?

[cali]

A budding ndustry sells 'offsets' of carbon emissions, investing in environmental projects. But there are doubts about whether it works.
By Alan Zarembo, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
September 2, 2007

The Oscar-winning film "An Inconvenient Truth" touted itself as the world's first carbon-neutral documentary.

The producers said that every ounce of carbon emitted during production -- from jet travel, electricity for filming and gasoline for cars and trucks -- was counterbalanced by reducing emissions somewhere else in the world. It only made sense that a film about the perils of global warming wouldn't contribute to the problem.


producer Lesley Chilcott used an online calculator to estimate that shooting the film used 41.4 tons of carbon dioxide and paid a middleman, a company called Native Energy, $12 a ton, or $496.80, to broker a deal to cut greenhouse gases elsewhere. The film's distributors later made a similar payment to neutralize carbon dioxide from the marketing of the movie.


It was a ridiculously good deal with one problem: So far, it has not led to any additional emissions reductions.

Beneath the feel-good simplicity of buying your way to carbon neutrality is a growing concern that the idea is more hype than solution.

<snip>

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-sci-offsets2sep02,0,3441587.story?coll=la-home-center


The short answer is no.

[Cameron27]

1. I wish Democrats would stop promoting this.

I've read that many times these carbon-credit investments go nowhere -- newly planted trees fail to survive etc. I'll try to find the article, I thought it was an eye-opener.

I'd be against them even if they worked, simply because they're so heavily biased in favor of the rich.

[cali]

2. yep. And there's no accountability in the business

It could largely be one big Ponzi sheme.

[murray hill farm]

6. Maybe the unspoken target is the rich.

And that may be OK...the rich are a bigger part of the problem, not only in the carbon they produce, but in the industry that the rich support. If a rich person can continue their lifestyle while buying a feeling of freedom from conscience...or status as such...who cares. The message is out there. If even 50% of the trees failed to survive, than another 50% did survive and that will make a difference to our earth. It is the owning of the message that counts for now and if even one thousand rich folks decide..for whatever reason..than the message is taking hold and that effects the collective conscienced even a little, then that is an important path for us to begin to take.
For us of the unrich, we can do little things that also count. Beyond changing light bulbs and insulating our homes and car pooling, we can plant in our own yards (no matter how small)..if we have yards, small square foot gardens that easily give a family of four all the produce we can eat in a summer. In even a small city lot, we can plant our own trees and help them grow. A small city lot can support 10 or 12 fruit trees and in just a few years, they too will provide food for the family. even in an apartment, fresh herbs are easy to grow and tomatoes in pots can thhrive. It is the acceptance of the message that is the important occurance here and now.

[cali]

7. Ho do we know that carbon offset trading

is legitimate? We don't. It's not regulated. No one has oversight.
And frankly, to paraphrase Gandhi, people should be the change they want to see, and that means that people that speak out against global warming and yet live in houses that gobble energy or fly private jets, aren't doing that.

[murray hill farm]

8. We do not know these things.

I believe that Gandhi was saying that each of us should concern ourselves with being the change we want to see...and to not concern ourselves with what or how another sees or does not see. No matter how small the change in perception, it is a change...and that it begins with first the perception and then the action of even one or a few, but that it then exists not just in the one being, but in all of being...and can never not exist once the perception of it is recognized. Soooooo...ha...anyway...blah, blah..she does go on and on. But it (the carbon offset business) may or may not be on the 100% up and up...may not, in all cases, be all that for sure effective, etc...and although it may be (and probably should be someones concern in the way of regulation, etc)it need not be of great concern because the change in perception and the existance of the perception of the value of this change has occured. It has occured to such a degree that business have evolved to allow rich folk to feel the need to pay money to tree planters...so that they will feel less guilty..and trees do get planted...even if some % do not survive. That such businesses can evolve at all with such a mission..even if they grow rich doing it, is in itself a huge indicator of the world wide change of perception. In the mean time, we can plant gardens and trees in our own yards, further advancing the being of change we want to occur...and the instrument of advancement of both the collective consciousness and collective unconsciousness of our world.

[cali]

3. kick

[seriousstan]

4. I am currently selling carbon credits at BELOW market rate.

By purchasing MY carbon credits, from OHWHATADAMSUKERIAM.COM, you will be instrumental in my promise to...

1. Not build a coal burning power plant

2. Not mine the coal for the power plant.

3. Not create the coal runoff sludge pond.

I will also, for no added cost,

Not fly private jets

Not build a house as big as John Edward's or even Al Gore's.

Not purchase a fleet of large SUVs.


Please hurry, this offer can't last long.

P.S. there is a per household limit of as many credits as you can possibly buy.

[cali]

5. Which spurs some serious questions. n/t