Carbon Offsets For Sale

Having observed the recent carbon footprint debate, I just realized something. My Father passed away in 1983 and willed his estate to me. Given that he hasn't used an iota of carbon in decades now, I'm thinking I'm sitting on quite an accumulation of non-carbon wealth.

So, if any Liberals are looking for absolution for their all too carbon friendly lifestyles, email me and I'm sure we can work soemhting out through Paypal.

Filed under: All your carbon footprint are belong to me!

Comments

[The Liberal Avenger]

Dick Cheney is losing his mind and this is all you have to talk about?!

[Hard Right]

hey LA, project much?

[mightyjoeyoung]

Offsets/ credits were being pushed by George W. Bush in the Clear Skies Act.

So they work when Bush proposes it, but is ridiculed when Gore uses it?

I see in your mocking, you again refuse to acknowledge that Al Gore used the more expensive green power, uses solar power, carbon offsets, and energy efficient lighting and heating. Because if you did that, you would have to acknowledge how dishonest it is of you to not mention how much energy his house would use if he didn\'t actually live by what he preached.

Then you would also have to acknowledge that you have been repeatedly been dishonest in comparing his energy usage (he\'s got two fully staffed offices running out of there mind you) to the \"average\" family.

But, being the goalpost shifter you are, you\'ll just pull out some nonsense about how he said he invented the internet.

Then when that\'s disproven...love canal and then love story, etc....

[LOL]

or you could just get a job like a normal person dan

[BobInStamford]

Maybe the goal of Bush's little Iraq adventure was carbon offsets. Perhaps he and Rummy figured out how much energy would be saved based on the number of civilians 'liberated' by gunfire and US troops killed by IEDs. Bush may not be as much of a moron as people think.

[Jeff]

I have bought enough offsets to last me three lifetimes, I can go to a prostitute every night...

Ooops I meant indulgences... that is totally different.

I will not be buy carbon indulgences.. err offsets... And I have a size 12 carbon footprint. Make my lynching quick Mr. Gore.

[Jeff]

You know what they say about a big carbon footprint right?

[Zifnab]

I'm not even sure if you people know what "purchasing carbon offsets" means. But you've certainly developed a nice bit of tunnel vision concerning it. Why haven't you bashed the environmental irresponsibility of solar and wind power? Where's your angst-ridden diatribe against floresant lighting? Surely you can give us a compelling reason why hybrid cars are going to be the death of the American economy.

What? Nothing? Oh yes. Carbon offsets. I must have gotten off topic by discussing things that were actually relevant to the debate.

[scarshapedstar]

From what I understand, Cheney could use the help; his electricity bill was a tidy $186,000 in 2001.

[Jeff]

Ziffy... Come take a walk in a place where reason prevails and not everyone is an idiot. OK young Ziffy, a carbon offset is something you pay a corporation so you can pollute. If you use X carbon, you must pay X for your offset. Now, if everyone buys an offset, what happens? Someone gets rich from the offsets you purchased, yes. You are poorer than you already were, yes. But the fact is no one is changing their activities. They are still polluting.
That is why Dan is attack carbon offsets. You are a little confused and think for some reason that conservatives are out to destroy the environment at any cost. We are not, but we use logic, and are able to look at both sides of the argument. And carbon offsets are a crock.
Now run along young Ziffy, I believe you have some phonics homework.

[scarshapedstar]

Oh, and did I mention that he passed on the bill to taxpayers? Stick that in your small government hole and smoke it.

[Jeff]

"From what I understand, Cheney could use the help; his electricity bill was a tidy $186,000 in 2001."

Ummm... Cheney isn't a champion of global warming. It doesn't matter.

[Buzzy]

Maybe he's saying that Gore isn't any different than Dick Cheney when it comes to being a millionaire who made his money by investing in huge corporations and using huge amounts of electricity? Obviously they are saying that Gore is pimping a program that isn't any different than Bush's Clear Skies initiative although it does obviously allow a filthy rich individual to buy carbon offsets so they can pollute as much as they want. Meanwhile back at the ranch Nancy Pelosi wants a much bigger airplane so she can spread more tons of carbon in the stratosphere than the previous Speaker of the House ever thought of.

We could also compare Al Gore's killowat hours when he was VP if you want to go there.

If you're serious about the environment then you know that anything that includes offsets is about money and power and nothing about the pollution. It's all a scam kids.

[Phoenix]

So, if I forgo hardon footprint offsets for a week, will I be a virgin?

[templar knight]

No, Phoenix, that virgin thing is a one time only deal. But I have heard that some Muslim women try to get their virginity restored by some kind of medical procedure. That Muslim/virgin thing is really confusing.

[TYPICAL LIBERAL]

The Goracle says: Virginity is a one time thing. However if have a green abortion, we can call it even.

What is a green abortion?

Algore will come to your house, convince you that everything you have is really non-existent, and just a bunch of wood and metal, then throw it into a woodchipper and compost it.

Not much nicer than a real abortion, but way more fun.

[Jeff]

The Goracle says: Virginity is a one time thing. However if have a green abortion, we can call it even.

What is a green abortion?

Algore will come to your house, convince you that everything you have is really non-existent, and just a bunch of wood and metal, then throw it into a woodchipper and compost it.

Not much nicer than a real abortion, but way more fun.

[Zifnab]

"Ummm... Cheney isn't a champion of global warming. It doesn't matter."

Which is, of course, where you lose the debate. Pollution is just fine, but you can't stand imagined hypocrasy? That's sound logic.

As for carbon offsets, we'll overlook the fact that they are entirely voluntery, much like solar panels and hybrid engines, and address the price.

"The IPCC has concluded that "The mitigation costs through forestry can be quite modest (US$0.1–US$20 / metric ton carbon dioxide) in some tropical developing countries.... The costs of biological mitigation, therefore, are low compared to those of many other alternative measures... As little as US$90 will plant 900 trees, enough to annually remove as much carbon dioxide as is annually generated by the fossil-fuel usage of an average United States resident"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_offset

So the basic idea of carbon offsets is cheap, simple, and practical. I'm sure "McForestry" could emerge in the future if carbon offsets really took off, but I'm not seeing that as an immediate problem. Unlike "indulgences" which involved paying the church to forgive your guilt, planting trees makes an actual difference in the global climate and ecology.

So what, exactly, do you guys have against reforestation? Do conservatives just hate trees? Am I missing something about this entirely voluntery program that offends you so deeply? Or should I give you a moment to pick up those goal-posts and truck it back a bit?

[Jeff]

"Pollution is just fine, but you can't stand imagined hypocrasy"

Liberals are by nature hypocritical.

Soros avoided the taxes he loves increased by putting accounts in the British Isles.
Gore is a champion of the environment, yet he has destroyed it 20x more than I
Michael Moore hates the stock market system, yet he owned thousands of dollars in Halliburton stock.
Gloria Steinem said marriage was evil, and she got married.
Jon Kerry paid 16% tax on his big ketchup fortune, when people in the same tax bracket paid 32%
The Clintons owned property were if you are late on one payment, you lose all the money you put into it ( a rent to own scenerio). Many people lost teir retirement.

Lets see...

And yes, conservatives hate trees. We also hate panda bears, and koalas. And don't get me started on the ocean.

Here's the big question. If I can buy a couple trees why is global warming a problem, and why do I need to change my lifestyle? If I still need to change my lifestyle why should I pay some hippie to plant a few trees?

[Buzzy]

Zifnab, I love trees, and live among about 200 of them, and I love fresh air, clean water, and all the good things about Earth. For that reason I clearly debunk carbon offsets as being a ponzi scheme of gigantic proportions and Al Gore as the main problem with this movement.

You talk about some company that plants 900 seedling trees for $90US in some far away third world country but according to my own research they want $100 to plant 44 seedling trees to offset my "carbon footprint". Out of those 44 trees only about 22 will live to the age that they will actually sequester enough carbon dioxide to be effective. Where will those trees be planted, will they be planted? ARe you aware that nobody is checking to see that these trees are being planted at all?

When the eco movement talks about the rainforest being slashed and burned I listen because they are talking about trees. Al Gore is talking about companies (actually corporations) and selling this as a way that America can pay for it's pollution sins with money. Is pollute all you want as long as you pay for it the new mantra of ecology these days? According to Al Gore it is!

BTW, under this plan you could cut down all the old growth forests in the world and come out ahead since you could plant a thousand seedlings where only one tree once stood and come out way ahead. Think about it, politics aside.

Wait just a few years and you'll see just how big a scam this all turns out to be. Al Gore is as big a corporationist as anyone out there, it isn't about the trees or the climate or anything else good, it's all about money.

[Phoenix]

There are more trees on this continent now than there were when the Pilgrims arrived. There are a gazillion more trees now since the 1970's. Thank you, fertilizer.

"So the basic idea of carbon offsets is cheap, simple, and practical." No it isn't. It's a cheap, sleazy way to cover your butt and to hide your hypocrisy. It's not that it's a bad idea, it's just sleazy when it's used in the context of personal 'carbon footprints'. Make everyone feel guilty and your own hypocrisy is fogged out. No thanks. I'll do my part without being made a pawn of idiot political whimsy.

[Phoenix]

Jeff, why does TYPICAL LIBERAL and you have the same comment?

[Jeff]

I cleared the cookies, and the "name" box autofilled with "Typical liberal."

I just reposted so people would know its me.

[TheSpartan]

Gore is a champion of the environment, yet he has destroyed it 20x more than I

Ok, what about Greenswitch don't you understand? Gore chooses to buy more expensive power from Green sources for his home, so while he may use more power than you do he is not creating a bigger carbon footprint.