Skip to main content

Do These Pants Make My Carbon Offsets Look Big?

For any of you husbands, has your wife ever asked you 'Do these pants make my butt look big?" The correct answer is "No", but have you ever been tempted to say, 'Well, maybe a little." (I don't have that problem; my wife and I go to the gym nearly every day.)

At any rate, imagine how much more complicated it would be if butt sizes were like greenhouse gas emissions.

"Honey, do these pants make my butt look too big?"

"Well, actually sweetheart..."

"Don't answer that--first you have to realize that Denise is thirty pounds underweight, so I'm offsetting my posterior by her thirty pounds, and I borrowed fifteen pounds from Terri."

"Well, in that case, dear, those pants make you look just fine!"

Such is the logic (ergo folly) of most carbon offsets. The only reason that the Kyoto Treaty got enough signatories is that some nations got to count their relatively skinny butts. Russia got to count the fact that great environmental strides have been made since Communism nearly destroyed portions of Europe and Asia, while Germany got to count the environmental debacle that was East Germany. But they didn't have to do anything but watch Communism fall. Similarly, Britain had recently closed several non-productive coal mines, and their skies cleared up markedly because of that, but that made economic sense.

What's going to happen in 2012 when, during Kyoto phase two, nations really have to do something other than count phony offsets?

Some carbon offsets make sense, so I should put at least some of my joking aside. Planting trees is an excellent way to improve our environment, because trees breathe carbon dioxide and exhale oxygen. Anything we can do to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels (solar power, wind power, hybrid cars) is a good thing, but it must be real, and not just a fake 'offset'.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

School Vouchers: "The Bramble Memo"

$429 million? What? Where? The legislative fiscal analyst for the State of Utah calculated the costs to the public schools over the next 13 years if school vouchers are implemented. It said the costs would be $5.5M in the first year, and $71M in the 13th year. Suddenly, the number I have started seeing thrown around was $429 million, the total costs for vouchers over 13 years. Where did that number come from? Enter the mysterious "Bramble Memo". In the past few days several of us (Jeremy, Utah Taxpayer, Craig, Sara, Urban Koda, Jesse, and me) have (sometimes?) enjoyed a lively discussion about school vouchers in Utah . Jeremy clarified to me the costs of the venture by linking to a copy of the Utah Legislative Fiscal Analyst's Impartial Analysis (LFA) of the costs of Vouchers , found on "The Senate Site". In my previous voucher article, I quoted some of Lavar Webb's article from last Sunday's Deseret News, wherein he stated that those total costs ...

The Inhumanity of Bob Lonsberry: Waterboarding, Concentration Camps, and the the Bataan Death March

KNRS 570 radio talk show host Bob Lonsberry advocated waterboarding and other forms of torture during his show on April 21, 2009. More grotesquely, he was beaming with pride about his advocacy campaign. It's difficult to imagine then, that, by the same rationale, had Lonsberry been a German at the time of Hitler, or a Japanese during the Bataan Death March, that he would not have advocated torture of Jews in the concentration camps or the bayoneting and shooting of American soldiers on the Bataan trail. Torture, Torture, Everywhere! Nearly 80,000 American soldiers were captured by the Japanese in the To contemplate a discussion about whether or not torture is legal or whether it even works, it is first required to come to the conclusion that 'I am a child of God, but my adversary is a monkey'. Phillipines in 1942 and forced to march with no food and very little water for six days. If a man stumbled, if he didn't respond quickly to a command, or if he tried to get wat...

"Media Matters" But Not The Truth

I don't even like Rush Limbaugh, but it's clear what he said about "phony soldiers". I'm not sure why Media Matters can't get it correct. Maybe because they don't want to. Update: Who's calling who a phony? Huh, moveon.org? Update 10/5/2007: There are many "phony soldiers" that the government is investigating. Why would Rush Limbaugh say that all soldiers who are against the war are "phony soldiers"? They're not. Rush knows it. I don't know why he would say that. But I don't have to try to figure out why, because HE DIDN'T SAY THAT. Media Matters has this to say about itself on its website : Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media. At least they openly admit that they're only working at "correcting conservative misin...