Green Tuesday: The Lowdown on Carbon Offsets
Tuesday, March 11th, 2008When I first saw a TerraPass on an SUV, I was annoyed. Do people really think they can justify driving an SUV in an urban setting by paying for someone across the globe to plant some trees? But with green being the new black and carbon-neutral being the latest trend, I wanted to know, does it really work. Here’s what I found out.
What are carbon offsets?
The idea is simple. By getting on an airplane, I am personally responsible for a portion of the carbon emissions from that airplane. To compensate or offset that, I can give money to an organization that works at removing carbon from the atmosphere. It’s simple math. If I pay to remove as much carbon from the air as I put in, the net effect is zero or carbon-neutrality. I can enjoy my vacation knowing that I caused no harm.
So what’s wrong with that?
The problem is, it just isn’t that simple. First, not all offsets are created equal - some are good, some are less good (or arguably bad). Second, there are no standards, thus how much to offset is controversial. Third, the rationale behind offsetting is a short-term solution at best and arguably a convenient way to make those of us who can afford a carbon rich lifestyle feel less guilty about our impact on the environment.
Good Offsets vs. Bad Offsets
The carbon-offset industry is a mess. With no standards and dozens of “certifications”, as a consumer it’s tough to tell if you are really buying anything beyond a piece of paper. There are countless stories of offsets that turned out be meaningless, including some recommended by the British government.
Then there is the type of offset. You can pay to plant some trees, invest in solar energy, support training programs for 3rd world countries, replace old equipment with more energy-efficient equipment and so on. There are a multitude of options. What is a concerned consumer to do?
There is endless literature on the topic (see a handful of references below). But the quick summary is such:
Tree Planting: low cost, less effective than other methods, non-native plants may wreak havoc on the local ecosystem.
Renewable energy: wind power, solar power, etc. Lowers the emissions associated with generating energy.
Energy conservation: invests in equipment that lowers the demand for energy (sustainable housing, energy-efficient equipment, etc).
Methane combustion / capture - Significantly reduces the emissions from methane.
Another critical question to answer is, would the project happen if you didn’t buy the offsets? There have been countless scams where offsets were sold to support projects that were already funded. It’s key to find out if the offset is actually having an impact.
How much is enough?
Ok, so you do your homework and you find some good offset options. The next problem is that no two organizations measure your carbon impact the same way. So how do you know the right amount to offset? This is perhaps one of the most controversial problems associated with offsets. Until there are standards around this industry there won’t be a good answer.
The ethics of offsetting.
I found that I wasn’t alone in thinking that buying your way out of the consequences of your actions doesn’t actually compensate for your actions. It still rubs me the wrong way to think that by investing in solar energy it makes it okay for me to contribute to the problem by living a high carbon-emission lifestyle. First and foremost, before even considering offsets, I feel like I should do everything I can realistically do to reduce my carbon emissions. I see carbon offsets as the very last option when I have no other choice.
Want to learn more? Check out these articles.
- Practical Values: Paying for My Hot Air by Mother Jones
- The Inconvenient Truth About the Carbon Offset Industry by The Guardian
- Another Inconvenient Truth by Business Week
- Wikipedia overview on Carbon Offsets
Previous Green Tuesday Articles: