My brother Jack wrote to me recently about carbon offsets and a family holiday we were planning. My son, Callan and his new wife had chosen to celebrate their wedding by going on a South Pacific Cruise and inviting us all along. So 20 of the extended family were planning what was, for all of us, a rather unusual holiday experience with P&O. My big brother Jack, a committed environmentalist and techy, engineering type of guy, works on a community wind farm project in Victoria (hepburnwind.com.au) He wanted my advice on how we should all deal with the carbon emissions involved in our extravagant holiday. Here’s my reply.

Dear Jack

For once you’re in my knowledge zone. I’ve thought a lot about this issue, as many friends ask, and here’s where I’ve got to I my thinking. As I see it, there are basically five possible approaches:

1. Buy trees. This is easy to do with credibility. It is for some controversial but not for any fundamental reason – while it can be done badly, it can also be done well. Without a common accrediting body, you do need to be a discerning consumer here and do your research before you select a provider. Upside: you absorb the carbon directly and if done well, it stays out of the atmosphere for a long time. Some like it because it removes carbon directly, some don’t because it doesn’t address the root cause i.e. they’re concerned that the result is “you emit coal, we buy trees”. If done well, though, it has the upside of the other benefits of tree planting. A good example of that is the work Greening Australia does in planting biodiverse forests. See: breatheeasynow.com.au

2. Buy green power projects in developing countries. This is easy to do with my friends at climatefriendly.com who I think are the best offset company around, and this is their specialty. Another option here is E+Co a social enterprise that is focused primarily on community development, investing directly in small-scale clean energy projects. You’d like them, they are very “Jack” if that makes sense – they’re serious engineering types focused on doing good. The advantage of this approach, with either provider, is that you’re “addressing the cause” i.e. building green power, which is why some like it. It has the added plus of helping poor communities get electricity and water. Some don’t like it because they question whether bringing new power to people who haven’t got it is really reducing emissions.  (The answer is yes, if their alternative is kerosene and they replace it, but no if they had no energy previously). I like this approach because I understand what I’m really doing with my offsets is making myself feel good, while doing others some good as well. This does that.

3. Retire credits. Technically the most pure (and most boring!) thing to do is to retire European Carbon Permits. Rather than giving poor people lights or heat, you buy a piece of paper and tear it up, virtually. Why would you bother and why do my friends do it? Because EU emissions are capped at an absolute amount and permits are then issued for that amount of emissions and no more. So if you buy and retire permits you are absolutely sure that there will be that amount less CO2 put into the atmosphere directly by your actions. The argument in favour is that we (rich countries) caused the problem so we should fix it and that buying stuff for poor people is about guilt, not solving the problem (I’m not sure a poor person being given a light bulb in their hut so their kids can study at night would see it that way, but hey, each to their own!) In their defense, of course you can both give money to energy projects for poor people and buy your offsets separately. An example of this pure approach can be found at carbonretirement.com I don’t know them but seems pretty good. No question it’s the engineer’s answer. My friend Jorgen Randers (an author of The Club of Rome’s Limits to Growth, and very serious global green dude) does this and he buys double credits to make sure the calculation is right (then he knows when he flies he’s actually reducing emissions!)

4. Give money to campaigners. The argument here is that anything you do practically is pointless at such small scale because we need to change the system, get rid of coal and all the rest. As the argument goes, buying offsets takes our energy and focus away from the real problem, which is big nasty companies profiting from pollution. I see the point, but I wouldn’t recommend this approach to someone like you who is already campaigning – but if you like it, just give the money to me, your poor writer brother!! Seriously though, there’s lot of great campaigners out there who could use the support.

5. Accept that life is pointless. This argument goes that the climate is stuffed and we’re all going down, so be glad you’re stinking rich compared to those who need kerosene lamps replaced by E+Co, enjoy the cruise and ignore the world. Not sure this is sustainable for your soul, but I’m sure you’ll find company in the bar on the cruise of like-minded people, though hopefully not in our family!

See you soon.

Love

Paul

@environment [+]March 11th, 2010, 09:56