<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
	<title><![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Can&#8217;t we offset something other than carbon?]]></title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.grist.org/rss/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<description>Grist Comment Feed</description>
	<language>en</language>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #1 by Hmdowd6</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/offset-mania/</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2007 06:47:17 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/offset-mania/1</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>human nature</strong></p><p>I totally agree with you, but I think it helps people to be able to connect environmental preservation with their own lives and actions. I think that personal carbon monitoring and offsets helps people to make that connection.</p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>human nature</strong></p><p>I totally agree with you, but I think it helps people to be able to connect environmental preservation with their own lives and actions. I think that personal carbon monitoring and offsets helps people to make that connection.</p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #2 by naturescene</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/offset-mania/</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2007 07:16:57 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/offset-mania/2</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>it's like</strong></p><p>you've been reading my mind (or my posts)!</p><p>
you can give $ to "plant trees and improve water quality, increase wildlife habitat and help restore public lands damaged by natural disasters such as wildfires", and people do, but not in the numbers that we'd like to see.</p><p>
Elsewhere I mentioned that there is no point to call &nbsp;them "carbon" offsets and we could easily switch to calling them something simple like "environmental protection credits" or "ecological credits". &nbsp;But carbon is in the center of the the environmental "movement" these days. &nbsp;There's also a lot of it, so it makes for a big market.</p><p>
The whole point is to eventually move into a completely open market for ecological goods and services like habitat, water filtration, buffering, etc. &nbsp;The offsets serve as the intermediary to that realization.</p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>it's like</strong></p><p>you've been reading my mind (or my posts)!</p><p>
you can give $ to "plant trees and improve water quality, increase wildlife habitat and help restore public lands damaged by natural disasters such as wildfires", and people do, but not in the numbers that we'd like to see.</p><p>
Elsewhere I mentioned that there is no point to call &nbsp;them "carbon" offsets and we could easily switch to calling them something simple like "environmental protection credits" or "ecological credits". &nbsp;But carbon is in the center of the the environmental "movement" these days. &nbsp;There's also a lot of it, so it makes for a big market.</p><p>
The whole point is to eventually move into a completely open market for ecological goods and services like habitat, water filtration, buffering, etc. &nbsp;The offsets serve as the intermediary to that realization.</p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #3 by wiscidea</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/offset-mania/</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2007 07:49:24 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/offset-mania/3</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>one ity bity concern</strong></p><p>I was starting to come around to accepting the value of carbon -- and other -- offsets, but I'm worried about one thing.</p><p>
If people start volunteering a LITTLE BIT of money to preserve national forests, will the Republicans see it as a green light to cut ALL federal funding for preserving national forests?</p><p>
However much I hate slippery slope objections, I'd like to know whether this could be a serious problem. Opinions?

<p>Forward!</p></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>one ity bity concern</strong></p><p>I was starting to come around to accepting the value of carbon -- and other -- offsets, but I'm worried about one thing.</p><p>
If people start volunteering a LITTLE BIT of money to preserve national forests, will the Republicans see it as a green light to cut ALL federal funding for preserving national forests?</p><p>
However much I hate slippery slope objections, I'd like to know whether this could be a serious problem. Opinions?

<p>Forward!</p></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #4 by justlou</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/offset-mania/</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2007 09:13:50 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/offset-mania/4</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Racket</strong></p><p>What a potential racket this is! &nbsp;Looks out for all kinds of sweet deals, kick backs, cooking the books, rules written by lobbyists, and political corruption. &nbsp;Everybody and their dog is going to jump on this bandwagon. &nbsp;Where's mine?</p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Racket</strong></p><p>What a potential racket this is! &nbsp;Looks out for all kinds of sweet deals, kick backs, cooking the books, rules written by lobbyists, and political corruption. &nbsp;Everybody and their dog is going to jump on this bandwagon. &nbsp;Where's mine?</p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #5 by Green Granny</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/offset-mania/</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2007 09:23:51 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/offset-mania/5</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Sadly, I agree with justlou</strong></p><p>The market for "offsets" almost certainly will be taken advantage of by scammers, dirty politicians, etc. &nbsp;Good deeds rarely go uncorrupted by others to some degree. &nbsp;Look what happens to humanitarian aid, for example. But that does not negate the need for more "good deeds" - especially since most are not undermined by the selfish.</p><p>
I still would also like to see a carbon tax or pollution tax or energy waster tax. . .

<p>"We must be the change we wish to see in the world."  -- Mahatma Ghandi</p></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Sadly, I agree with justlou</strong></p><p>The market for "offsets" almost certainly will be taken advantage of by scammers, dirty politicians, etc. &nbsp;Good deeds rarely go uncorrupted by others to some degree. &nbsp;Look what happens to humanitarian aid, for example. But that does not negate the need for more "good deeds" - especially since most are not undermined by the selfish.</p><p>
I still would also like to see a carbon tax or pollution tax or energy waster tax. . .

<p>"We must be the change we wish to see in the world."  -- Mahatma Ghandi</p></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #6 by Biodiversivist</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/offset-mania/</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2007 10:07:46 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/offset-mania/6</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>A good example of a bad carbon offset idea<p>Bureaucrats are not going to save the planet.

<p>In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. <a href="http://www.poisondarts.net" rel="nofollow">Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world</a></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>A good example of a bad carbon offset idea<p>Bureaucrats are not going to save the planet.

<p>In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. <a href="http://www.poisondarts.net" rel="nofollow">Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world</a></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #7 by spaceshaper</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/offset-mania/</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2007 10:16:40 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/offset-mania/7</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>GE</strong></p><p>now offers a credit card offering offset points instead of miles. "Spend $750/month with our card and offset all your carbon emissions!"

<p>The true meaning of life is to plant trees, under whose shade you do not expect to sit.</p></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>GE</strong></p><p>now offers a credit card offering offset points instead of miles. "Spend $750/month with our card and offset all your carbon emissions!"

<p>The true meaning of life is to plant trees, under whose shade you do not expect to sit.</p></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #8 by JMG</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/offset-mania/</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:31:25 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/offset-mania/8</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Except the emissions</strong></p><p>Created by "THEM" over there (the yellow and brown hordes we're told to fear) to make the stuff you bought with your charge card -- that's THEIR emissions, not "yours."</p><p>
Gotta keep shoveling the coal into the firebox on this runaway train, don'cha know ... keep buying, keep consuming, keep spending, and for God's sake don't question whether such "progress" and "growth" is actually taking us further and further down the wrong path ...

<p>Save the world:  Reduce greenhouse gas emissions 5% annually.</p></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Except the emissions</strong></p><p>Created by "THEM" over there (the yellow and brown hordes we're told to fear) to make the stuff you bought with your charge card -- that's THEIR emissions, not "yours."</p><p>
Gotta keep shoveling the coal into the firebox on this runaway train, don'cha know ... keep buying, keep consuming, keep spending, and for God's sake don't question whether such "progress" and "growth" is actually taking us further and further down the wrong path ...

<p>Save the world:  Reduce greenhouse gas emissions 5% annually.</p></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #9 by Pangolin</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/offset-mania/</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:50:14 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/offset-mania/9</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>These guys are a little more honest....<p><a href="http://www.carboncreditkillers.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.carboncreditkillers.com<p>
Except if you know anything about forestry clearing the small stuff actually increases the longevity of the old growth. Planting trees does nothing to increase carbon storage in the real world. Where they would grow without assistance they tend to plant themselves. Where they require protection and nurturing we tend to plant and ignore them and they die. <p>
Should we ask the russions to turn the Siberian forests to charcoal in order to store the carbon? If they started at one end by the time they got to the other end the forest will have regrown but I doubt it would add up to much benefit. <p>
Carbon credit schemes are scams. 

<p><a href="http://putcarbonback.blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">Put  the Carbon Back</a></p></p></p></p></a></p></strong></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>These guys are a little more honest....<p><a href="http://www.carboncreditkillers.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.carboncreditkillers.com<p>
Except if you know anything about forestry clearing the small stuff actually increases the longevity of the old growth. Planting trees does nothing to increase carbon storage in the real world. Where they would grow without assistance they tend to plant themselves. Where they require protection and nurturing we tend to plant and ignore them and they die. <p>
Should we ask the russions to turn the Siberian forests to charcoal in order to store the carbon? If they started at one end by the time they got to the other end the forest will have regrown but I doubt it would add up to much benefit. <p>
Carbon credit schemes are scams. 

<p><a href="http://putcarbonback.blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">Put  the Carbon Back</a></p></p></p></p></a></p></strong></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
 </channel>
</rss>