Thursday, March 08, 2007

Is it just me or is carbon offsetting dumb?

The past few weeks we're having to read how Governor Arnold is "off-setting" his travels (new term "off-jet-setting?") by paying someone in Northern California to plant more trees at a rate of $10 per ton of carbon monoxide produced or something.

Is it just me, or this an idea whose time has dumb? Maybe I should be more upset at people who jet around the world for their convenience, but I know I'd do it in a heartbeat if I had the time and money. However, it's clear that such travel patterns eat up a tremendous amount of fossil fuel and generate a corresponding amount of pollution.

Even so, is there any way in which paying people to plant trees even begins to truly "offset" this pollution? And doesn't this whole notion just increase the idea that rich people get to consume as much of the world's resources as they want (now they just need to be even richer to do it?)?

My husband (Bill Magavern of the Sierra Club) has pointed out to me that if Arnold really wants to do something about pollution he could recant his endorsement/creation/obsession of the hummer--or at least stop driving one. Maybe that would off-set my nausea.

No comments: