Global Warming - Carbon Dioxide - Environment - Climate Change - Air Pollution - New York Times
Am I really reading this in the NY Times? A column that suggests that the carbon offset game is a nearly worthless charade? Could it be merely a 'feel good' option for folks who can afford it?
Skeptical? You bet I am.
I think the carbon offset business is a way for people to make money off global warming (the brokers who run these exchanges) while contributing almost nothing to reducing greenhouse gas [GG] emissions. Planting a few trees here and there or investing in a windmill somewhere on the prairie tells me we really aren't serious about solving the problem, assuming that man can solve it (doubtful under the best of circumstances).
Any solution should have measurable goal s , e. g., reducing GG emissions by 'x' tons annually will reduce the rate of temperature increase by 'y' degrees annually. Why don't I get that information from anywhere?
No comments:
Post a Comment