Comments oregonj has made
Holy Data!
Jabilo,
What a nice touch. I cite facts about rates of CO2 pollution - which has not, and cannot, be cleaned up. And you respond, without citing which pollutant you are addressing, with a quote from page 10 that discusses SO2 pollution, which everyone agrees has and can be cleaned up.
No wonder the coal and utility companies have no credibility in this argument. They have a lot of resources to sell the fantasy mantra of "clean coal" - but they lack credibility on the CO2 arguments, and with this kind of deception it should continue to sink further.On The right comparison between Obama and McCain on climate/energy posted 1 year, 5 months ago 13 Responses
Clean? Not at all.
When asked to point to clean plants, it is instructive that Jaballo points to the DIRTIEST plants and says 'not these'.
Too bad, though, that less dirty than dirtiest is still very dirty. All of these coal plants create more than 1800 pounds of CO2 per mWH generated, by far the dirtiest source of electricity generated in this country.
The equation is COAL = HIGH GLOBAL WARMING POLLUTION. On The right comparison between Obama and McCain on climate/energy posted 1 year, 5 months ago 13 Responses
A Chemistry Equation
Adam and Penfold -
There is a CO2 balance in the atmosphere. Humans are adding Capped CO2 plus Uncapped CO2 to that balance. An offset represents reducing a tonne of the Uncapped CO2 from being added (or one tonne being removed). Additionality assures that the offset tonne would have been emitted (or not removed)had the offset not been purchased.
An offset always obtains value from a capped system (even if it is only your personal accounting of getting to carbon neutral). The problem with being lax about offsets is that if you buy a lax offset in lieu of reducing your own emissions, nothing will have changed in the number of tonnes being emitted, since the definition of a lax offset is that there is not sufficient additionality (i.e. no tonnes in the uncapped sector are being reduced from what would have happened anyways) And if that is the case, the offset will have had no impact on the climate going from 380 ppm CO2 to 450ppm CO2 and beyond.
So that is why additionality is so important - and it is very difficult to measure. And that is why Terrapass, the CCX, and every supplier needs to be closely examined on the question of the additionality of their offset projects. And this market provides a classic situation where the "Buyer Beware" warning needs to be be strictly applied.On Carbon offsets are tricky business posted 2 years, 4 months ago 17 Responses
Polluter Beware!
WARNING, WARNING : Approach Offsets with Caution
Joe is correct - we are not going to 'offset' our way out of our global warming mess - we will need to reduce pollution from all of our sources.
- An offset is essentially getting a 'credit' from a reduction in an activity that is not currently under a cap. For instance, a Californian can buy a reduction from Nebraska power production only because Nebraska doesn't have a cap - YET!. By far the better action, if you really want to reduce CO2 emissions, is to produce fewer emissions as best you can - and let the Nebraskans reduce theirs also. We are going to need all the tools if we are going to meet the scientists' projections of a necessary 75% reduction by 2050.
- Buying 'green' power is not really an offset. That is an actual reduction if there is a real contract that ties your green power purchase to actual production that noone else is claiming. If the contract works as stated, that KWh bought from a wind turbine meant on less KWh bought from the high-carbon grid average.
- There is only what I consider to be one source of 'certified' offsets - and those come from the CDM and JI approved under the Kyoto Protocol. These are the only truly 'certified' offsets since they fall from a mandatory compliance scheme that sets enforcable targets for CO2 reductions. Now the JI and CDM process is not perfect, but contrast that to the CCX which many participants consider much of the offset inventory sold there of very little value in actually reducing GHG gases any more than would have occurred anyways.
- An offset is essentially getting a 'credit' from a reduction in an activity that is not currently under a cap. For instance, a Californian can buy a reduction from Nebraska power production only because Nebraska doesn't have a cap - YET!. By far the better action, if you really want to reduce CO2 emissions, is to produce fewer emissions as best you can - and let the Nebraskans reduce theirs also. We are going to need all the tools if we are going to meet the scientists' projections of a necessary 75% reduction by 2050.