We all have a carbon footprint. Everything we do, directly or indirectly adds CO2 to the atmosphere. For example, the CO2 produced by the plane you took to Paris, the car you took to work, or the production of energy used to power the Wii you exercised with last night all contribute to your carbon footprint and global warming.
In Europe, they have begun to pay a closer attention to human actions and the contribution those actions have to the changing environment. It has become “trendy” to reduce this carbon footprint, both that of individuals and companies. Companies have began to market themselves as “Green”, “Carbon Neutral” and include statements of “sustainability”
This growing awareness is certainly warranted given the evidence that global warming and CO2 emissions are an increasingly problematic issue. However, the methods by which companies and individuals are dealing with the issue might not be doing any good, especially in regards to carbon offsetting.
Carbon offsetting is based in the idea that you can purchase an “offset” to your personal carbon footprint (Normally measured in Tons of CO2). For instance: If you take a plane trip and have a propensity for ensuring your activities are “green”, you can contact a company called
TreeFlights. This company claims they can accurately predict the amount of CO2 you are producing with this plane trip and, for a fee, can plant a designated number of trees to “offset” that CO2.
Other companies like
Terrapass and
Climatecare claim they can offset not only your plane and car trips, but also the portion of your carbon footprint produced by the energy your home uses. They use the money to fund programs lowering emissions elsewhere, thus compensating for YOUR contribution to global warming.
This all seems like a viable solution to the growing problem of climate change. Right? The problem is, it doesn’t really seem to change anything. Paying someone to reduce their carbon footprint, while not reducing your own, seems irresponsible. Mathematically, we are only shifting numbers to make it appear as if there is some real response to the issue. There is also some question, as to whether or not the money you are paying for offsets is being used to actually reduce emissions at all. Lastly, Scientists disagree on how to calculate an individual’s carbon footprint, making these calculations approximations and possibly extremely erroneous.
What’s to stop larger companies from buying substantial amounts of carbon offsets as an excuse to evade challenging their own procedures to actually reduce their emissions? Of course, those companies won’t admit that’s the reason, but I can see them sending out PR that says basically “Offsetting has allowed our company to increase productivity threefold”. All the while, their “carbon footprint” increases with it.
It’s great to see companies, at the very least, giving some sort of thought in the “green” direction. There should also be some substantial action on their part. Throwing money at the problem will not solve it. It takes change in habit and routine. It takes effort!
Habitat for Homonids
Given my incredible interest in evolution, and my recent dance with Dino’s, I have decided to delve into the fossil record. While researching this topic I will keep you all posted. Each Friday, I hope to post information on the fossils including; when and where they were found, when the organism lived, what they tell us about evolution and other pertinent information. By the end of this project, I should have accumulated a somewhat linear timeline of ancient life. 
