environment { put your money where your carbon is
http://carbonfund.org/site/pages/calculator/
From what I've been able to find out, this non-profit buys carbon emission rights and retires them.
http://carbonfund.org/site/pages/faq/
According to their calculator, Nerdwife and I generate 36.79 tons of CO2/year for our home life (didn't calculate our respective jobs, but I just guess that mine alone will generate enough carbon to plunge the world into a second dark age).
I'm considering donating. Its a first step. I'm also looking into ways to reduce our consumption and decrease our carbon dependence.
2 comments:
Come criticism of carbon offsets and carbon emissions rights trading.
While I agree with 'The Rising Tide UK', however, these criticisms really bother me. Here are my reasons (I did bullet points so I could keep them straight in my head, I'm back on caffeine after going a week without to see how it would be, but that is another discussion), I will now take a differing viewpoint to further advance debate on this and to clarify some of my positions:
a) yes you can't 'own' carbon, but
b) something is needed as a starting point
c) carbon trading is not perfect, but, it is a starting point upon which a framework that capitalists can understand can be built
d) CO2 emission is intangible so people don't have a good idea of how much is a ton, how much they create, etc., carbon calculators and assigning them to a $$$ amount allows the normals like me to see, in terms that directly impact me and that I can understand
e) these criticisms provide no alternatives, and when alternatives are suggested, they don't seem fully thought through, or are incomprehensible to the average global citizen, I will provide more on this later on
What I would like to see is the next 'phase' to be some 3rd party un-biased oversight and enforcement for those who exceed their CO2 emission allotments followed by a 'phased' reduction. Much like what 'Rising Tide UK' is suggesting, but here are the issues I see with their arguements:
(my comments prepended with ++)
---Rising Tide UK---
THE REAL SOLUTIONS TO CLIMATE CHANGE ARE UNDERMINED BY CARBON TRADING
· Educate the public on the urgency of climate change and the need for dramatic solutions
Carbon trading is a false solution and undermines individual responsibility
++that isn't working so well right now, people hear sound bites on the infotainment that is media, then get in their SUVs to go to McDs for dinner. Unless you can somehow show them the cost (in ways that haven't already been de-sensitized by the infotainment industry) then it is moot. too me things like carbon calculators help. my criticism of carbonfund.org (and why I haven't donated yet) is their lack of tangible proof or where your money goes. you get a certificate, but you can also get one for naming a star...which really doesn't change the name. if I had a way to do this figured out, I would be doing it, as of now I don't have an idea, but I think carbon calculators with $$$ values is a good start.
· Set a schedule for cutting global fossil fuel consumption by up to 60%.
Carbon Trading is an excuse for avoiding any significant net cuts
++good idea, remember Kyoto? if one of the big boys don't play nice, it is undermined. eventhough it sucks, the US is willing to play in the carbon trading game, or at least many big US companies are, of course a lot of them was to change the game (like microsoft does with technical standards, but that is another post), which is where oversight comes in, which with the current gov't is laughable. again if I had a solution, I would be working towards getting it implemented. until then I still think carbon trading is a step in the right direction, but it is not an endpoint, it is the start of the journey.
· Recognise the moral (and political) imperative for fairness and social justice by allocating targets to every country on the basis of equal per capita emissions
Carbon Trading institutionalises existing inequalities and rewards the largest polluters
++and existing 'global market' economics (i.e. WTO, IMF, etc.) don't? I agree we need to make people aware of the total impact and total cost of ownership of our society and economy (and most of the industrialized world's). and while short term it rewards the largest polluters, it also allows for some kind of metric to track the largest polluters, or can if it doesn't already. to solve a problem you must first be able to gauge the magnitude, without that you're just pissing in the wind.
· Reduce the supply of fossil fuels with an international ban on all new oil, gas and coal development. As a first step, cut the $200 billion per year global subsidies for coal and oil power.
Carbon trading is not concerned with the supply of fossil fuels, which is why oil companies support it. As a result, government subsidies are increasing, reducing the price of energy and swamping any attempts at demand management.
++good idea, I fully support this, perhaps a grass-roots campaign to raise money to counter the global oil/fossil fuel/energy companies lobbying effort is in order.
· Invest heavily in renewable energy to replace all fossil fuel supplies
Although Carbon Trading promotes itself as funding renewables, this is far more expensive per ton of carbon than credits from bogus "hot air", tree planting, or outright fraud. These cheap carbon credits will set the market price and soak up the capital.
++good idea, but what incentives currently exist to make the 'largest polluters' switch? honestly there won't be any startups that solve this without major change in funding that the gov't is unable or unwilling to set forth. the 'big boys' need to step up to the plate, and they won't unless it is economically feasible. however I feel any steps in the right direction (carbon trading) are good starts.
· Involve people at all levels of society in solutions
Carbon trading is an inherently elitist, corporatist, technocratic solution. It provides no role for civil society, and fails to deal with the 50% of emissions from houses and personal transport.
++I support this but experience tells me this is herding cats. the only thing harder to organize than IT people going to lunch is liberals, who are on the same side. now take that a step further and include opposing sides and the ignorant and those that don't care. environmentalists themselves are as elitist as the carbon traders they rage against. the thing people forget is that corporations are like governments, they are made up of people (and people fund all their initiatives, but in the case of corporations any costs incurred are either shifted to gov't or passed directly on to consumers). we will always have a role in civil society. boycotts work. bad press works. again I think grass-roots will be the success of the counter to the claims made in this point
--end---
If we just pull the plug on this, it will trigger something I call the 'passion effect' which I see all the time, it will trigger people's emotions and emotions override their rational centers. Most American's don't know this difference anymore since our media and government is geared towards keeping the 'passion' side turned on all the time.
(NOTE: I couldn't read the NYT article due to my Ad blocker preventing click-thru of a ads.doubleclick.com advertisment, so I'm really only responding to the Rising Tide UK article)
Post a Comment