Jump to content

Recommended Posts

My wife decided that she'd check out our own carbon footprint, and got on line and found a calculator on a website, which spat out a carbon emission/year figure after a few questions about car use, air travel, etc. At the end, it gave an amount that could be donated to a fund that would offset the CO2 emissions. only trouble was, that however she tweaked the figures, the amount was always the same, and I got the impression that the whole thing was a sham.

 

I think that projects which reduce or genuinely offset carbon emissions should be funded by governments and supported by us all, but it seems that human nature always prevails, and someone will always try to find a way of cashing in our guilty consciences.

Link to post
Share on other sites

while i think it is a welcome initiative, there have been lots of problems with companies that offset your carbon emissions (for a fee). most of the problems have been with regard to auditing their operations.

 

there was an interesting piece on triple j about it recently. you can listen to it here:

 

http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/hack/notes/mp3s/carbonoffset.mp3

 

"If you're concerned about the pollution you create just from driving, flying and living every day life maybe you've forked over cash to offset your carbon emissions. That's when you pay money to invest in say renewable energy or a tree-planting project. But how do you know your money is going where it should be? The only checks put in place by the federal government is an accreditation scheme called Greenhouse Friendly. But that scheme is voluntary so its up to each company to decide what they do. Jane Castles from the Total Environment Centre says this could lead to people being scammed."

 

if that link doesn't work, go to http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/hack/notes/default.htm and scroll down to the "Carbon Offsets" episode

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Originally Posted By: Oyuki kigan
 Originally Posted By: SirJibAlot
LIVE EARTH - ok, so how many watts of electricity are they saving with those massive stages, lights, and Jumbotrons? Perhaps the best way to save the earth would be to not have the concert....



sure, and i suppose i all the environmental organizations could stop printing and advertising the cause because it is a waste of resources.

For all the hooplah, i could be a hell of a lot worse. Sure, it may be a small step, and insignificant in itself, but i see the concerts as part of a larger movement to make environmentalism 'mainstream'.

I see it as kind of a symbol that these issues are finally being accepted as a 'norm' in the culture, rather than as some fringe movement that bitches about spotted owls and plays hackey-sack.

It is a contnuation of many small, important steps that out culture needs to make if we want to leave this rock in a livavble condition for the other life forms we share it with.

that said, most of the music sucks.


They could have at least had big ass solar panels or SOMETHING!
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get the whole carbon trading thing....

 

So, if I'm a rich country spewing Carbon, I can just buy some credits from say, Iceland - and the environment is not harmed? Crazy...

 

They need to get the indonesians to stop burning down the rainforests, then we'll be golden!

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Originally Posted By: thursday
A seat belt would've saved her, but she was hounded like no other person on earth. What kinda life was that?


Ask Kate Middleton, she's at least still around to answer the question...
Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...