Carbon-Neutral Is Hip, but Is It Green?

From The NY Times
April 29, 2007
Carbon-Neutral Is Hip, but Is It Green?
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/29/weekinreview/29revkin.html?ref=environment

Among celebrities and large corporations, there exists a lot of "green hype" including the idea of buying carbon offsets -- basically paying money to a company that might fund carbon-neutral energy or plant trees on one's behalf to absorb CO2. The practice is heralded among many but also ridiculed by others who claim it is like buying the right to pollute -- but that the end result is still pollution.

From this piece:
“The worst of the carbon-offset programs resemble the Catholic Church’s sale of indulgences back before the Reformation,” said Denis Hayes, the president of the Bullitt Foundation, an environmental grant-making group. “Instead of reducing their carbon footprints, people take private jets and stretch limos, and then think they can buy an indulgence to forgive their sins.”

My Take:
While it certainly is no solution to our problem of climate change, once closely regulated and given a watchdog to see that funds are used to do what is promised (be it planting trees or building wind generators), this could be one small important part of the puzzle for combating climate chage.

While planting trees is great, and serves great purposes of providing shade, habitat, some CO2 absorption (of course Oxygen production) as well as possibly reducing the heat island effect in urban areas, questions still remain about the actual amount of greenhouse gases that will be removed.

The better bet for those who wish to offset their carbon footprint is to donate to those groups who use the funds for carbon-neutral energy production, such as wind power, because that prevents all the more greenhouse gas emissions from going into the atmosphere. Because trees are great, go out and plant one on your own if you would like to have an even greater positive envirohuman impact (more on trees in future posts).

Introduction

Greetings!

Thank you for your visit. This blog is the result of both my own frustration with current environmental conditions and the lack of healthy political dialogue leading to swift progressive change related to the environment in the U.S., the world's largest polluter.

More than those reasons, this blog also is the result of hope for better environmental policies. There are reasons to celebrate positive changes and to demand constant progress. Here we shall not condemn one political party or the other, as both main U.S. political parties have failed to produce the magnitude of leadership necessary to tackle the environmental problems we face today and in the near future. While some will argue that one party or the other has championed better environmental policies, the fact remains that neither has done well enough and such arguments are not bringing us closer to solutions.

Many of my postings will simply be linked articles concerning the environment, energy consumption reduction, energy production from "green" sources as well as opinion pieces by myself and others related to the environment. My goal is to inform readers of the political decisions and science that is the basis for the most important issue of today, to inform them of the little daily tasks and purchases they might make more environmentally consciously, as well as those products that can help reduce our own vulnerability to environmental damages. Further, that information will arm readers to make more environmentally sustainable decisions and to spread the word that small solutions can make big differences when taken together by many. Sermons will be avoided as we all pollute -- and take this blog not so much as recommendations, but more so a gathering of ideas related to the environment: a place to read about the subject matter and decided for oneself what measures are not too much to ask, not a place to feel guilted into a life without indulgence.

I am not a scientist. I do read much on these subjects but I make no claim to be a model "non-polluter." This blog will be as much a challenge to myself as I hope it will be to others to partake in "greener living," a bottom-up approach to saving our natural habitat from pollution to increase the chances that someone near the top will engage in the necessary leadership to make the means of product and energy production and consumption more environmentally friendly. Some measures that will be listed some will view as "extreme," and they may well be, but others will be simple, nearly sacrifice-free. In many cases, they are not only better for the environment, but they may make better financial sense. The challenge is to not do "everything" you can but to do something to reduce the damage you individually do to the environment, and, in turn, reduce the amount of damage of our society as a whole.

In the end, the two important questions I hope you will not necessarily answer, but at least keep in your mind here and more importantly, when you leave here and open your wallet, is "What is the environmental impact of my decision?" and, "What is the human impact of the environment on humans as it changes from our own consumption?"

Environmental policy includes ethical and moral issues just as economic and foreign policy do. It has the potential to unite countries singularly but it also transcends borders and could unite people in one battle not against nature, but for nature. It's not the classical nature vs. nurture debate, but rather a decision we all need to make to nurture nature. The solutions are within reach -- for those with the will to reach forward.