The Dynamic Center: Investigating Carbon Offsets

Posted by Dan Martin on 04.06.2007

Do these programs offer hope to average citizens who wish to confront climate change?

The post-Oscar news blip about Al Gore's energy usage included a rebuttal from Gore's spokesperson explaining that the former Vice-President offsets his carbon usage so it is really a non-issue. Of course the size of his home, the fact he purchases more expensive hydroelectric power, and the fact that his home is also part of what is likely a small working farm might also explain his energy consumption. Still the notion of offsetting ones carbon emissions by investing in renewable energy that produces enough clean energy to offset the emissions one produces is interesting enough to deserve further investigation.

How Offset Programs Work

Offsetting carbon emissions can generally be accomplished by finding ways to reduce carbon output by an equal amount as one contributes to carbon emissions. So if my car produces 6 tons of CO2 in a year, I need to find a way to cut fossil fuel consumption by an amount that will mean a 6 ton reduction of CO2 emissions in order to be carbon neutral when it comes to my car. Cutting fossil fuel consumption in order to offset CO2 can be accomplished in a number of ways.

First, some offset programs attempt to find organizations and companies that will implement more efficient energy practices. Climatecrisis.org, Al Gore's website associated with An Inconvenient Truth, claims that compact fluorescent bulbs use 300 fewer pounds of CO2 per year than the traditional incandescent bulb. If my contributions to a carbon offset organization led to a large building installing 40 compact fluorescent bulbs, I would offset 12,000 pounds of CO2 and thus offset my 6 tons of automobile emissions. Similar math could be done on contributions that lead to better insulation or more efficient cooling for a large consumer of electricity.

Some might describe this as a "soft" offset in the sense that it reduces power consumption when it comes to something like lighting or cooling, but does not guarantee a cut in fossil fuel consumption because power use in another area might rise.

This leads to a second sort of offset, purchasing wind generators and solar panels in order to generate zero emission electricity. Such an offset might be considered more solid than the energy efficiency based offsets because it changes, even if only slightly, the sources from which the power grid draws its electricity.

These offsets function in much the same way as the efficiency offsets. If I fly cross country to see the Grand Canyon, I can use a carbon calculator (see more on this below) and figure out what my share of the carbon produced by such a flight is. A 5000 mile round trip flight leaves me on the hook for almost 1 ton of CO2 according to carbonfund.org. If I could contribute money to help build a wind generator or set of solar panels that would generate enough electricity to cut the emissions associated with burning coal by 1 ton, I have once again offset my carbon footprint.

A third form of offsets exists, some offset programs attempt to plant trees in order to absorb the carbon a person produces. Trees are generally considered to be very good for the environment. Tree roots help stop erosion, trees provide habitat for many creatures, the shade trees provides cuts cooling costs for many homes, some trees fix nitrogen to the soil, and for many other reasons trees are beneficial to the environment. It is not however clear how effective trees are at offsetting carbon. In tropical areas, it seems trees might offset carbon in other areas the science is less optimistic. I am not telling people not to plant trees – in fact planting a shade tree can cut cooling costs by 10-15% and that would be a pretty solid carbon reduction. Plant trees!

Emission Trading

In order to prevent the sort of soft offsets we described above, it is possible to buy and retire emission certificates. The U.S. Congress will likely push legislation that will make this practice more transparent and convenient for U.S. companies and citizens. However, some emission trading already exists. Carbon offset organizations often buy carbon credits and retire them so the net emissions in theory drop. Emission trading helps create a greater economic incentive for energy efficiency.

Major Offset Providers

If one is interested in offsetting carbon, researching in order to find a reliable group is necessary. The three most popular offset organizations are Carbonfund, TerraPass, and Native Energy. Each offers different prices for offsetting 1 ton of carbon, and the reasons for these price differences are not exactly clear to me. Carbonfund is a non-profit organization and offers the three types of offset projects listed above. It has received a number of awards as well. TerraPass is the only one of the three groups that is audited by an outside group. It seems to function in much the same was as Carbonfund minus using tree planting as an offset project. Native Energy works in a different method. Rather than investing in large wind turbines, Native Energy focuses on smaller wind generators and methane capturing at small farms. Such localized projects are less efficient in one sense because money cannot be pooled for a large wind generator. On the other hand, localized changes in electricity production do make changes in multiple grids; whereas, if I live in Ohio and my contribution goes to a wind farm in Texas, I am not directly changing the power source used by my local grid. Thus, each offset service offers different prices and philosophies on how to achieve reductions in global warming emissions.

Carbon Calculators

One thing all of the three organizations listed above have in common is the presence of Carbon Calculators. Such calculators allow a person to find out what emissions their car or air travel amount to. They also offer the opportunity, after inputting some basic data on electricity consumption and heating bills, to see what one's total carbon impact is. From there, a person can become carbon neutral by offsetting all direct carbon emissions or become carbon zero by offsetting all direct and indirect emissions.

Is this the Open Channel?

Global climate change seems inevitable. The science may not be in total agreement on the consequences, but just about every informed voice is arguing that human generated carbon and methane are changing world weather patterns and will continue to do so. Such a global problem can seem overwhelming. I as a citizen can do certain things: recycle, compost, use energy efficient bulbs and carpool, but as a U.S. citizen even if I bicycled everywhere it would be hard to be carbon neutral.

In this way, carbon offsets seem like a great way to empower concerned citizens. Changes in the home and apartment linked with offsetting carbon can help a person swim upstream on a tough problem. Also, whether it is Al Gore offsetting a lot of carbon or an average person becoming carbon neutral such donations help the renewable energy sources in the U.S. to drop in price. Such lower prices help push the market toward cleaner energy. Finally, since this is a movement from below, conservatives do not have to worry about Big Brother growing.

Does this make Carbon Offsets a panacea?

No. U.S. consumption patterns have to change. It is as simple as that. The good news is that the average user of carbon offsets is a person who is recycling, composting, carpooling, using public transportation, and using compact fluorescent light bulbs. The average user of offset programs is not trying to buy a clean conscience. If that attitude takes hold along with more widespread offsetting, U.S. society might be getting somewhere. My only other piece of advice for those contributing to carbon offset projects is to also try to leverage ones environmental impact at work and at places of worship etc. If a person can make a case for better light bulbs at work or better stewardship at a Church, Synagogue or civic group, that too would lead to carbon reductions even if they are not as easy to quantify.

PS - a thanks to Jason Easley and Ray Church for their kind words.