Going Carbon-Neutral: Pros and Cons of Carbon Offsets
By: Yen Lee on 10 31, 2007
The New Oxford American Dictionary’s word of the year for 2006 was “carbon-neutral,” which gives you some sense of the fad that is carbon offsets. With the success of Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth, there is a rising wave of guilt about the carbon dioxide that we each produce in the course of our daily lives, and carbon offsets gave us a way to erase that CO2 along with the guilt. “Carbon-neutral” is just a cooler, sexier, trendier way of communicating the same “guilt-free” consumer mentality that American culture is known for – e.g. “fat-free,” “low-cal,” etc.Well, the truth is, carbon offsets like those that TerraPass sells are a lot more complicated than all that. The principle behind an offset is that to compensate for your own carbon dioxide emissions, you buy a share in a project that is actively reducing carbon emissions somewhere in the world – including renewable energy projects, reforestation schemes, bio fuel production, and anything else that might be a carbon sink or prevent carbon dioxide from entering the atmosphere. We recognize the value of these carbon offsets while also acknowledging their limitations:
Carbon Offset Pros:
- In cases where emissions are inevitable, offsets provide a way to do something to remediate the effects.
- Offsets are a source of investment for renewable energy and other projects to mitigate climate change, therefore filling the void that some governments have left by not stepping in to regulate and/or limit carbon dioxide emissions.
- In many cases, offsets are a catalyst for change in the developing world, where renewable energy projects funded by the developed world could be the basis of a sustainable growth and development curve going forward.
Carbon Offset Cons:
- Buying offsets makes people feel that it’s okay to pollute if they simply compensate for their actions by buying credits.
- Offsets are unlikely to be as effective and permanent in removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere as we are in emitting the carbon dioxide to begin with.
- The industry is almost completely unregulated and therefore largely not held accountable for the emissions promises it makes.
Our Bottom Line: Although we support the idea of purchasing offsets from a reputable company to mitigate inevitable carbon emissions, we think that the term “carbon-neutral” is misleading, because it lends too much credit to the effectiveness of the nascent carbon offset industry. It also takes attention away from non-global warming related environmental issues and what we can do individually to reduce our impact and need for offsets. Carbon offsets should be used in combination with the other environmentally responsible travel practices like selecting an environmentally-friendly hotel or choosing an environmentally-friendly destination, not as an indulgence that can be bought to pardon all of our environmental sins.
8 Responses
Flying is responsible for 2% of greenhouse gas emissions globally and with the flight industry expanding this figure is expected to rise even more. Perhaps instead of thinking ’should I carbon offset this trip?’, we should be exploring possibilities for travelling locally by car, bus or train, rather than abroad.
Jane, I totally agree that offsets are not the ONLY solution. Until Richard Branson can make a plane run on biofuels (which Virgin is planning to demonstrate next year) or, better yet, solar power, we can’t just offset our carbon emissions and call it a day.
However, I’m not of the opinion that we should all stop traveling abroad. As I’ve said before on this blog, there’s an argument to be made that travel and tourism plant the seeds of social and environmental change across the globe. My solution: think twice before you take that international trip, and if you do go, make sure you’re staying long enough to enjoy it and distribute your carbon footprint over more travel days.
Problem is that unless China, India and other big polluters hop on to the carbon offsets wagon, everything you do, or don’t do, is a waste, practically speaking. The real solution to global warming is not to go back to the stone age, but develop clean fuels which won’t be as harmful.
I bought a Terra Pass for my car, but I also bought a Prius becuase I wanted to do something good for the planet (and becuase it is a GREAT car). I am always unsure about the purchase of the offset, but I know I can’t completely eliminate my impact and I feel like doing something is better than doing nothing.
I love the discussion here, all. This gets to the heart of the matter.
PLing, technically, you’re right, of course. If the developing world doesn’t cut their emissions, then our offset purchases won’t mean much at all. Then again, if the offset projects are certified and executed properly, many offset projects actually are renewable energy projects in developing world countries. If the market grows and becomes more regulated, it will be a great way to both offset emissions while also beginning a process of technology transfer to the developing world.
Giselle, I like your spirit. I share your skepticism about the effectiveness of offsets at the moment, but still feel they are better than nothing. If our government would act to create a national carbon cap and trade system, the sorts of control and auditing needed to produce an efficient market would arrive more quickly. Until then, we should do just what you’re doing. Drive a fuel-efficient car and purchase offsets.
I agree with Tom and Giselle. Carbon offsets are a temporary solution and I think it fills the need of people to throw money at problems.
Free things (lifestyle modifications, using less, etc) are generally free but take more effort and most people don’t quite know what to do.
I tend to disagree with PLing. Calling the developing countries “useless” kind of ironic due to the fact that the U.S. is the largest consumer of the world’s energy and produces a quarter of the world’s carbon emission.
Great piece, I posted it on Digg for you. We’re also putting a link to you from an article we’re doing on green vacations.