Carbon Offsets For Airline Passengers

Andrew Glazebrook

Sun Aug 12 05:13:02 -0700 2007

manage

I'm glad my airline didn't do that when I had my summer holiday (Aus-> USA -> Cuba via Mexico -> USA -> UK -> Aust), I'd probably have polluted about a years worth of residential electricity CO2 emissions (I do about 4.8tons/year according to my electricity bill).

If I used the option of having all my energy come from a renewable source (costing $4.40/week extra over regular power, for countryenergy to source 6470kwh, which is about 1800 above my consumption), it'd cost AUD$230, or about AUD$76 to save about the CO2 your flight was (which isn't too far off twenty pounds). That is funding new green engery production... for $1.50 / week it will come from renewable sources (with only 10% coming from new "green" sources, but the rest still coming from renewable sources such as hydro).

Maybe they should have given you a 12 pound option to pay for me to have renewable energy ;).

It is interesting that if I took up their offer, for $78 extra per year (about 20% more than my existing charges, though someone else would also get some renewable energy subsidised by me) I'd be responsible for 0 tons of CO2 due to my residential electricity usage.

Of course, this is where having a carbon tax would help make for incentives and where the whole carbon credit trading scheme business was supposed to step in to (though it does seem to be slowly developing).

Lets try another calculation. My car is half decent on long distance runs, but the short journey to work ruins fuel efficiency. So assuming it is as bad as 20L/100km on the short run (about 2km each way), it would be 4L/week which is supposedly 9.2kg/CO2 a week. Working that out to be about a quarter your flight, someone could give me $5pa to ride instead of drive. Which would be negligible and no incentive to someone on a comfortable western lifestyle, but could be reasonably substantial to someone in the third world (who probably wouldn't use a car for such a short trip anyway... I did it for 2.5 years before buying a car.. but now struggle to be motivated enough to do it once a week).

Funding solar hot water heaters to replace electric would probably be another good option. Putting money to interest free loans would enable it to be used many times and solar hot water heaters are supposed to be paying themselves off pretty quickly these days. Looking at my bill, I used almost as much electricity heating hot water as with everything else (I'm glad off peak hot water electricity is a third the price of regular electricity). A smaller hot water system / lower temperature (or on-demand hot water) would probably take a good chunk out of my CO2 emissions too (and then there are those microwave based on-demand systems which should be a good deal better again once readily available).

It did occur to me at one point to consider if there might be a business opportunity in funding solar hot water systems for people and either leasing them or charging them some rate discounted on the electric cost (say 10% less), so that there is no capital cost disincentive (though I doubt it'd cover the capital costs, especially with increased rates of wear and tear due to the user not owning it and so caring less about it).

Carbon Offsets For Airline Passengers

Thomas Lord

Sun Aug 12 08:57:24 -0700 2007

manage

Don't freaking believe it, Bruce.     You have no scientific measure of the impact of your travel on carbon flux, only a cause to be cautious because airplanes do produce a lot.   You have even less than no scientific measure of the impact of the carbon credit projects on global climate.   All you have here is a side effect of a U.N. attempt to impose a U.N. tax on all economic growth, globally, with the aim of directing that tax towards U.N.-favored development projects.    The history of U.N. development projects in achieving their stated aims is, at best, very suspect.

Save your money and, as you suggest, upgrade your solar panels or buy more local organic food or work on creating local jobs in East Oakland or.... anything, please, besides trading in phantasmagoric "carbon credits".

-t

Carbon Offsets For Airline Passengers

Alan

Sun Aug 12 21:22:37 -0700 2007

manage

a U.N. attempt to impose a U.N. tax on all economic growth, globally, with the aim of directing that tax towards U.N.-favored development projects. The history of U.N. development projects in achieving their stated aims is, at best, very suspect.

How the hell do you get "UN tax" out of this story?

I actually feel sceptical as to the utility of carbon credits as doing much to solve the problem, but please don't make it part of some white helicopter conspiracy theory. This is about businessmen trying to cash in on people's concerns, not imposing a New World Order.

Carbon Offsets For Airline Passengers

Thomas Lord

Sun Aug 12 21:42:56 -0700 2007

manage

How the hell do you get "UN tax" out of this story?

The idea of credits comes with "cap and trade" in which developing nations promise to cap emissions (as defined by the UN) and then turn "the right to emit" into a commodity permit.   Permits are minted by the UN and first sales are in exchange, generally, for giving money to UN emissions-reduction projects in developing nations.

So: there is an added cost of business to many kinds of growth, such as building a factory, at least in developed nation signatories to the system -- they have to, directly or indirectly, buy indulgences from the church of the U.N. with those monies spent to administer U.N. development programs.

So, this is very much a system of UN-directed global taxation directed at devoping nations with the revenues raised to be spent under UN direction.

How competent do you think the UN is at getting that spending right?   I have a serious question about whether it is an effort that is "better than nothing."

I mean, I'm all for the abstract idea of "pay as you go" emissions controls: pay for your economic damage where the price is set such that you can't do much harm.  Very fine fantasy of an idea.    The inconvenient truth here is that nobody is competent to spend those payments or even to establish a reasonable "first-sale" price for those permits.

-t

Carbon Offsets For Airline Passengers

Alan

Sun Aug 12 23:38:09 -0700 2007

manage

So, this is very much a system of UN-directed global taxation...

I'll try not to get too angry with you this time, but this is just loony conspiracy theory. The UN doesn't "direct" anything in this world. The UN is a bumbling bureaucratic organisation, blocked at every turn from doing good (or evil, as you prefer) by the intransigence of its member states in actually living up to the high ideals they sign treaties about. Anything "the UN" does is a product of agreements hammered out between member states.

It's particularly misleading to call this a UN tax, when the UN has nothing to do with how it's spent. In this case, it's a consortium of bankers who decide where your money goes if you decide to sign up for it.

Carbon Offsets For Airline Passengers

Thomas Lord

Mon Aug 13 00:01:20 -0700 2007

manage

The UN is a bumbling bureaucratic organisation,

We agree about something, at least.

So, where do new credits come from?   A bunch of bankers you say?   Officially, new credits come from things like the Clean Development Mechanism.   As Wikipedia puts it:

The CDM is supervised by the CDM Executive Board (CDM EB) and is under the guidance of the Conference of the Parties (COP/MOP) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).


With all the chat on Technocrat recently about the ins and outs of central banks, you'd think we'd recognize one when we see it.


-t

Carbon Offsets For Airline Passengers

Alan

Mon Aug 13 00:42:29 -0700 2007

manage

So, where do new credits come from? A bunch of bankers you say?

Yes. The UN isn't "directing" them, they're choosing to follow the recommendations of a committee. The bankers could decide to follow, say, Greenpeace's, or your, recommendations next week if they thought it would look better on the prospectus.

The UN is toothless. No nation state will allow it to infringe in their "sovereignty". They're only a threat to parking in Manhattan.

Carbon Offsets For Airline Passengers

Gerard

Sun Aug 12 10:28:04 -0700 2007

manage

I'm having a hard time deciding if the whole thing is sad, silly, stupid, or just an advanced way to pick your pocket through your guilt gland.

Carbon Offsets For Airline Passengers

Paul Jackson

Sun Aug 12 12:12:03 -0700 2007

manage

I suspect that one solid project that reduces carbon emissions, returns financial gain and actually propagates on it's own merits, rather than scaremongering via the Global-warming-as-religion crowd would have one hell of an impact. Especially if it were backed by a reasonably intelligent and connect person like yourself.

Carbon Offsets For Airline Passengers

dfm

Sun Aug 12 12:55:57 -0700 2007

manage

I read some of the c.a.r.b.o.n.n.e.u.t.r.a.l.c.o.m info, and in the  climate change overview section  they claim "The principle GHG is carbon dioxide (CO2)." but it is not, water vapor is!
Also in "the way forward" they claim to "not yet have the means to bring global emissions under control." and toward the end they talk about standards of  integrity and reach of regulation.

After those words an old parable came to mind, 'If the moon can raise the ocean tides seven or eight feet, imagine what gravity does to the brain!"

I do not understand these outfits or the goals they proffer any more, it is all hot air to me, in my  own opinion.

If the co2 is a danger why does the world not switch to nuclear power?  The only way to level co2 emission is with nuclear power.

Here is one appalling fact. An average 1000 megawatt coal burning power plant burns about 4 million tons of coal per year. That one plant produces over 12 million tons of CO2 each year – and over 500 tons of radioactive uranium and thorium up the smokestack and into the atmosphere for all to breathe.  We now have over 450 coal burning plants operating in the U.S. every day. The number will be about 600 plants within five years -- even if we start building nuclear plants today. We can not even stop the building of new coal plants for at least ten years.  Can we afford to wait any longer?

Ref: The global warming hypocrites www.kgoam810.com/viewentry.asp
more stuff here: www.kgoam810.com/djadditionalinformation.asp

This switch would cut co2 emission in half, and I understand France is doing it now while reprocessing the spent fuel!

When will the global village use the only solution that works?  Very soon, I hope.

Carbon Offsets For Airline Passengers

pyro9

Mon Aug 13 12:20:15 -0700 2007

manage

Oddly enough, well managed nuclear is the best ecological answer available. While nuclear waste is no laughing matter, it is containable and all in one place. Can you just imagine a coal fired plant attempting  to contain 100% of it's emissions?
The best part is that if we implement something like IFR and start by reprocessing the existing spent fuel rods "temporarily" stored in water pools we will end up with a net decrease in nuclear waste and in the length of time it must be stored.

All of the dreams of fusion are great, but 25 years ago it was "25 years away" and now it's STILL "25 years away".  I am all for renewable and distributed energy where possible.  However, some of our current and future uses require great deals of energy and preferably a high density generation facility. Further, clearing land for wind and solar is NOT a positive step for the environment. As such, it makes a lot more sense as an offset to demand in rooftop applications rather than large high powered central generation.

Carbon Offsets For Airline Passengers

Uncle Entity

Sun Aug 12 13:09:45 -0700 2007

manage

Did a calculation for a week of my job. I wish I could change the fuel mileage because I suspect it is way too low but here's what I get:

• $1,435.83 for Futures Portfolio.
• $1,099.24 for International Communities portfolio.
• $1,001.74 One World portfolio.

Looks like I could quit, sell my 'carbon reduction' and make about the same amount as I do today. I'm starting to like this carbon economy...

Carbon Offsets For Airline Passengers

President4242

Mon Aug 13 16:37:06 -0700 2007

manage

Boy, you must have one hell of a commute.  I entered a "typical" week for me (when I only hear from my management by phone, my park & ride to the train is less than a mile from home, and I don't do any extra outings)- for some reason it gave me the calculation in pounds, but basically for someplace between $10-$15 a week I could completely offset my commute.

Carbon Offsets For Airline Passengers

Uncle Entity

Mon Aug 13 16:55:14 -0700 2007

manage

Commute, that's my job...

I really need to figure out how to sell my 'carbon reduction' now. Turns out I was fired 3 weeks ago but they just didn't inform anyone of this fact. Not only do they expect to work for free but actually got mad at me for just stopping working because they stopped paying me...because they fired me.

Wouldn't be so bad execpt this is no surprise, just an average day really. Boggles my mind how they stay in business.

Carbon Offsets For Airline Passengers

President4242

Tue Aug 14 12:30:14 -0700 2007

manage

I'm sorry to hear that- my last job loss lasted 2.5 years and really changed how I think about a lot of stuff.  I'm sure you'll be out for much less; unless of course the whole economy tanks in the mean time.

Your own projects.

Bhima

Sun Aug 12 14:41:51 -0700 2007

manage

I'm not very confident in carbon offsets, mostly because I don't have a lot of confidence in businesses I don't actually witness in action.  I also travel by air often.  Truthfully I have done little directly to offset the pollution created by this travel.  However, I do bicycle most days with good weather.  I do buy locally produced food.  I do live in a predominantly solar powered home.  And I do own considerable forested land holdings, including a few damaged sites which I understand after the clean up and 10-20 years will recover their ability to sustain complete forest cover.

Is my lifestyle carbon neutral?  I have no idea.  But I feel better spending a few thousand dollars on this sort of thing rather than buying what this business proposes.

Carbon Offsets For Airline Passengers

Charles E Hill

Sun Aug 12 15:21:12 -0700 2007

manage

Right now I live in the Chicago area, but have been contracted in the Washington, D.C. area.  I -- and 15 other people -- fly back and forth, every week, Monday and Friday.  I've been doing this for four months and will be continuing to do it for the next 7 or 8.

On the other hand, we carpool in D.C. and I frequently walk to/from the hotel/office.  Back at home, my house is pretty much downtown one of the little suburbs.  My kids walk to school, and my wife walks everywhere -- including the grocery store.  We've used the car for maybe a total of 20 miles in the last 4 months.  I've replaced every bulb in the house with CFL, and installed a rainbarrel for our outdoor watering needs.  We had a bumper crop of tomatoes this year and my wife learned how to share them with the local rabbits and squirrels who absolutely insisted.

In short, I do my own offsets.  I neither trust nor believe the carbon credits companies.  I stated in one editorial here on Technocrat that I believe them to be the modern-day equivalent of indulgences.  Reduce, reuse, recycle.  Plant trees.  Carpool.  Use mass transit.  Telecommute.  Buy local.  Re-evaluate your lifestyle as to whether or not you need all the little crap that you've accumulated and do something about it.  Just don't PAY someone ELSE to do something about it.

Carbon Offsets For Airline Passengers

Spider

Mon Aug 13 00:46:13 -0700 2007

manage

Carbon taxes, CO2 emissions, methane emissions, disappearing dollars, don't drive your car, build windmills, solar cells, dont fart, go GREEN, Kyoto protocol,  IPCC working groups 1,2,3,4.  Al Gore nature movies, melting ice caps, 100 year floods, 100 year droughts, hurricanes, tornadoes, I guess we have to be thankful that cows dont fly.  Not sure about elephants though, especially the pink variety.  The question is, are we all doomed?  Where's me bong.