Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Up set over Off sets


       Well its been a busy weekend!    I was very impressed with the level of interest in arcane energy issues, and also the high level of respect and cordiality among the group, despite disparate view points.  Give yourselevs pats on the back.  

    Today we have something non- controversial - offsets!  :>)

     We have a few interesting item.  Grist's, Umbra takes a shot, but ends up throwing up her hands and basically admitting that its pretty hard to tell which if any f the options offered do anything.  She concludes that maybe its just simpler to cut your own emissions.

"I’ll be frank with you, Heather: The world of carbon offsets is confusing. Some of the groups involved are well intentioned, others are less so. Even if you do lots of homework, you’re ultimately just putting your money out there and hoping for the best. So I have some other ideas for you. First, the best thing we can do when it comes to emissions is reduce our impact as much as possible. A few years ago, Nike made headlines by announcing that, instead of continuing to buy carbon offsets to make up for employee travel, it would (drumroll please) increase teleconferencing. So endeavor to fly and drive less. If you must drive, use a fuel-efficient car. If you must fly, try to supportmore efficient airlines."

     Kevin Anderson is pretty clear -  a pox on all their houses.

     "Offsetting is worse than doing nothing. It is without scientific legitimacy, is dangerously misleading and almost certainly contributes to a net increase in the absolute rate of global emissions growth."

 Some climate conference tried to atone for the fact that the scientists are flying in from around the world by incorporating offsets into their program.  .  He refused to go!   To see why see.  here and here

     Finally, here's a 2009 study of some offsets, finding that only 30% of the dollars go to emission reductions.

      Out here is the woods, there is a lot of enthusiasm for offsets -   schemes which pay forest owners to grow trees. .   Never mind whether they would grow the trees anyway,  or whether they are required by law to re forest after a harvest.  !!      

   I sure hope "cap and trade"  works better!  :>)

Labels: , , ,


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home