Carbon offsets; a scam or something good? I had never heard of carbon offsets before and was surprised to learn that carbon offsets work like this...You pay money, as an individual or business, based on your carbon output. So you can calculated based on your car, how you heat and power your house, how often you fly and/or take the bus, to determine your carbon output. Then you pay the amount the calculator determines, and that goes to funding projects such as renewable energy or reforestation, therefore “offsetting” the carbon output you give off living your daily life.
A renewable energy certificate or REC is a representation of the property rights of the nonpower qualities (environmental, social, etc) of generating renewable energy. REC’s allow buyers to support renewable energy even when there may not be any renewable sources local to them. The figure below shows how the work by detailing how physical electricity and REC’s work separately and together in a renewable generator.
Figure 1: Renewable Energy Certificate Use
Image Source: http://www.renewableenergycredit.com/REC_chart.jpg
This image shows how a REC works. It shows the two components of a renewable generator source: physical energy and REC’s and how they work together.
At http://www.carbonfund.org/ I plugged in my information to find out what my carbon offset would be. They had me input how many people lived in my house, what kind of heating we use, what make and model my car was and how many miles a year I drive it. Since I do not own a house, but live at home (when I’m not at school) I put in that there are 6 people in my house, instead of just me, because all six of us live and use the heat and electricity, etc. I added my car, but because I do not drive a lot at school that number was fairly low, compared to what it might be if I had to commute to work or school everyday. My total was $333.52. Again, that number might be different if I could calculate for just myself and not my entire family. It would also be different if I took into account my lifestyle at school. If I wanted to simply offset 1 ton, it would cost me only $10.
At http://www.nativeenergy.com/ I plugged in information differently. They simply wanted to know the number of houses and specific sized cars (small, midsized, large). So I said one house and one midsized car. My output according to this site was 18 tons of carbon, or $252 to offset. This was less, but they did not need specifications for how big the house is or how we heat it. They also narrowed down car by approximate size, but not make or model. On this site, simply offsetting 1 ton would cost me $14 dollars.
If I had to pick one of these to complete my offset, financially I would lean towards Native Energy, because plugging in 1 house, 1 car was cheaper for me. But the Carbon Fund allowed me to be more specific and while it was using averages and did not take into account that maybe I never turn on my lights or only run heat for 2 months rather than maybe always having a light on, or running my heat from October to April, I was able to get a more realistic view of my carbon footprint. The Carbon Fund has far more partners than Native Energy, and is a non-profit organization, but Native Energy had some more recognizable clients including companies that work in food, music, and apparel such as LiveNation, Clif Bars, and Under Armor. Each included insurance agencies and environmental agencies, which I am not as familiar with making it difficult to judge who has more reputable partners. I am curious to know why Native Energy would charge $4 each ton to offset. That doesn’t seem like much when dealing with 1 or 2 tons but make it thousands of tons and the difference is much more noticeable.
This strategy of taking money based on your carbon output, in tons, and turning it towards making clean energy or reforestation sounds well and good, but it could lead to more issues. I think that people who are struggling right now to pay for heat that they need (especially during the Polar Vortex this past winter!) would fall into debt and could end up fighting this. It seems as simple as, use less heat or drive less, but people still need to find a way to heat their homes and get to work (not everyone has public transportation around them). I think that this sounds great, but until there are other options, which this is working towards supposedly, that people can turn to instead of fossil fuels. I think that if there were readily avaiable and affordable options for people to switch too, this kind of offset or tax could be a great motivator. It just has to be done in the right way at the right time, and who gets to decide what way that is and when? Those are the tough questions.
Bibliography
http://www.epa.gov/greenpower/gpmarket/rec.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment