The Skeptics Column: Carbon Offsets

The Skeptics Column:
because manifest is an action verb.

The Carbon Offsets Market is getting a little crazy. It's strange to watch to watch progressives go wild for market-driven economics while conservative financiers are leary that the market will work this time.

SpaceShare struggles with this. We've tried to create a low-budget, get-our-hands-dirty and do the work ourselves, new-economy (progressive new-economy with fair exchange and pay what you can, not web new-economy of banner ads) approach. Meanwhile we watch the folks who do little other than be middle-men earn vastly more income, taking cuts as people try to donate to be greener. Should SpaceShare join in, and try to grab a few bucks from lots people? Doesn't the constant chirping for money contribute to overload instead of activism? Don't many of the people giving $1.25 to green their ticket think it is going straight to a green cause, not having a quarter taken off the top before it is even given to the nonprofit - or corporate polluter - who is getting paid only perhaps to do something different?

Does this sound like where you want to give your money: you give $10 to green your airline ticket. Perhaps $2.50 goes to the organization whose link you used. (All the ones I've met are honest, nice people who'd like to drive a Prius and want to save the world by inspiring you to give while they organize, but they need to pay for their office, their webmaster, their moderate salary in order to pass your money to the next greener.) They might give the money they don't take to a wind farm being built for a utility that was required by law to use at least 5% renewables, and is claiming the rights to those carbon offsets, so you pay them to follow the law.

If you upgrade your festival or conference ticket to a green ticket with carbon offsets, what did you just buy? If you don't know, you're likely to see a market where much of that money disappears into admin costs, where much of that money does strange things like pay last year's largest polluters to cut back a bit (which could have been done with a cap or a tax instead of a carbon market where we pay them not to pollute.) Carbon Markets are often far less progressive than even badly designed regressive carbon taxes: do we really want them? Should coal companies be paid not to pollute, or utilities be paid for meeting minimum renewable requirements?

Dream global, give local. Instead of giving a few bucks to a carbon offsetter who'll do you don't quite know what with the money, find a cause where you know the people, find a cause where people are busier working than asking for money, or just buy some compact flourescents and help your neighbor install them.