I got an email yesterday from a local radio reporter about a story that ran in the Washington Post a few days ago: "Carbon Output Must Near Zero To Avert Danger, New Studies Show."It's a good read (also a scary read), detailing new studies that show we need to reduce global emissions almost to zero if we want to avoid further warming. Not just reduce them a lot. Reduce them to zero.
In light of the story, the reporter asked me a question specifically about Carbonfund.org: "Now if we are to believe the studies behind yesterday's front page Post story - we can't just offset, we need to stop altogether. Is this a good or bad story for your business?"
Here's the email I wrote back:
We’ve always said we’d be happy to be put out of business by some massive transformation to a clean energy economy. But barring that, carbon offsets can act as a bridge. All that carbon that’s already in the atmosphere? The only way to take it out and put it somewhere else is by the types of reforestation projects we support. Meanwhile, helping to aggregate demand for clean energy like wind power and solar power is helping to drive down the cost of those technologies – which will hopefully lead to the kind of economic transformation to clean energy we need. So in answer to your question: our goal one day is put ourselves out of business, yes.
1 comments:
We can cut and cut and ruin economies, but we'll never do it. Here's why:
Nature produces as much CO2 in one day as man has produced since 1912 (as of last year, therefore, now the date is 1913). Each day! So if we wanted to cut down every tree, kill every insect (of which there are a billion for each human), and tear every blade of grass from the ground, then we'd be about there. Then we'd be down to just getting rid of humanity.
I don't know where this writer gets his info. But clearly, it wasn't from nature itself. Maybe from his own desire to scare everyone into communism or something.
Thought-provoking, but this is gonna have to go into the 'false' bin...
Post a Comment