5 ms·

Timber Company Sold Millions of Dollars of Useless Carbon Offsets

6 points by montalbano 5y ago

wallaBBB 5y ago
https://archive.is/3KdWD https://archive.is/3KdWD 0 surprising info in the article. Moreover, do we really want to allow big oil to buy carbon credits, with their history of manipulation, lobbying and misrepresenting data...
quantified 5y ago
It seems likely that most, if not basically all, carbon offsets one can purchase, are fictional. Meaningful transparency, accounting, and technical validation of the efficacy seem pretty much non-existent. The physical plausibility of big enterprises becoming “carbon neutral” by being massive carbon producers but purchasing offsets to become neutral seems ludicrous. The planet’s ability to absorb gets less every day and yet somehow more and more offsetting is occurring as offsets get sold?
- vba616 5y ago
  If carbon offsets are fictional, then so are CO2 emissions. The numbers have meaning when summed over the whole planet. If there's no accounting for the whole planet, then they don't mean anything. It's also ludicrous that carbon intensity should be policed on a scale smaller than the planet. Would it make sense to regulate a semi truck to have the same emissions as a personal car? Or a software company the same as a mining company? Just because one can point to the current system of accounting and say it's not working doesn't mean there is any alternative to fixing it. It's like pointing out that you won't be able to find your keys in the dark, and advocating looking under the streetlight, when they're not there.
  - quantified 5y ago
    Doesn’t follow. Show some actual proof of carbon being offset? High school science can show CO2 emissions. Oh, a tree that has existed for 100 years is offsetting carbon? It was offsetting carbon for 99 years already before you started paying someone for it. When it burns, do you get your money back? And show me any proof that 10 different parties didn’t each adopt this same tree and are each paying for it.
    - vba616 5y ago
      >Show some actual proof of carbon being offset? Like tiny lettering saying "offset" visible in a microscope? >High school science can show CO2 emissions Oh, it can? How do you tell whether a sample of CO2 came from fossil fuels or not? Edit: perhaps you can tell something with isotopes or something. That's not my point. The point is that it's all fungible for AGW purposes. The goal is to reduce the amount in the atmosphere.

6 points by montalbano 5y ago

https://archive.is/3KdWD https://archive.is/3KdWD 0 surprising info in the article. Moreover, do we really want to allow big oil to buy carbon credits, with their history of manipulation, lobbying and misrepresenting data...

quantified 5y ago

It seems likely that most, if not basically all, carbon offsets one can purchase, are fictional. Meaningful transparency, accounting, and technical validation of the efficacy seem pretty much non-existent. The physical plausibility of big enterprises becoming “carbon neutral” by being massive carbon producers but purchasing offsets to become neutral seems ludicrous. The planet’s ability to absorb gets less every day and yet somehow more and more offsetting is occurring as offsets get sold?

vba616 5y ago
If carbon offsets are fictional, then so are CO2 emissions. The numbers have meaning when summed over the whole planet. If there's no accounting for the whole planet, then they don't mean anything. It's also ludicrous that carbon intensity should be policed on a scale smaller than the planet. Would it make sense to regulate a semi truck to have the same emissions as a personal car? Or a software company the same as a mining company? Just because one can point to the current system of accounting and say it's not working doesn't mean there is any alternative to fixing it. It's like pointing out that you won't be able to find your keys in the dark, and advocating looking under the streetlight, when they're not there.
- quantified 5y ago
  Doesn’t follow. Show some actual proof of carbon being offset? High school science can show CO2 emissions. Oh, a tree that has existed for 100 years is offsetting carbon? It was offsetting carbon for 99 years already before you started paying someone for it. When it burns, do you get your money back? And show me any proof that 10 different parties didn’t each adopt this same tree and are each paying for it.
  - vba616 5y ago
    >Show some actual proof of carbon being offset? Like tiny lettering saying "offset" visible in a microscope? >High school science can show CO2 emissions Oh, it can? How do you tell whether a sample of CO2 came from fossil fuels or not? Edit: perhaps you can tell something with isotopes or something. That's not my point. The point is that it's all fungible for AGW purposes. The goal is to reduce the amount in the atmosphere.