Flying and buying trees blog discussion
MSE_Jenny
MSE Staff 1.3K Posts
This is the discussion to link on the back of Martin's "Flying and buying trees" blog. Please read the blog first, as the discussion follows it.
Read Martin's "Flying and buying trees" Blog
0
This discussion has been closed.
Latest MSE News and Guides
Replies
couldn't agree more with the point though...
You're just paying for some company to plant the wrong kind of trees on the wrong kind of land.
http://www.newint.org/features/2006/07/01/keynote/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,1673264,00.html
In reality, the carbon offsetting company has paid about 50p per tree in a forest that is already planted and paid for (probably with government money). This 50p is to make sure the forest stays there for 99 years, and cannot be chopped down.
When the program spoke to someone who looks after one of these forests, they said that the original intention of the forest was to stay there forever. So the money you are paying is actually doing nothing, other than giving the forest a small amount of money for signing an agreement about not being chopped down (which was their intention anyway) and giving the carbon offsetting company a lot of your money!
I think we need to be very careful about these carbon offsetting companies (I'm sure some are better than others).
As always we are looking for the easy out, instead of making real lifestyle changes. If we can spend a few pounds on some 'carbon neutral' scheme (scam) then we can abdicated our environmental responsibility as someone else is taking care of it for us. The old "I gave at the office" phenomenon. Making small changes in our lifestyles is immeasurably more effective than buying a (scam) tree. Not only does the science not add up with these schemes (scams), but the 'quick-fixers' are actually out of pocket, along with the environment.
In this technological world of video conferencing, email and SMS, the need to fly is arguable. Keeping in touch has never been easier or cheaper. A 5 hour video conference is much less damaging than a 5 hour flight. Especially if you use a green energy supplier.
I made a personal choice over 10 years ago not to fly again. My family live in South Africa and Australia, and my 62 year old mother is well aware that I will not be attending her funeral when she finally goes to the big garden in the sky. I have not seen them in over 13 years, but that is the commitment I have made to being 'green'. I own a car, but have not driven more than a total of 1000 miles in 5 years. Again, a personal choice. We can all do our bit, and it does not have to be as drastic as my choices. England is becoming warmer and warmer, so that argument of sunnier climes is becoming a bit redundant.
I have three small kids who will be around with theirs when the brown stuff hits the fan in around 2050. When I pop my clogs I want it to be in the knowledge that I did all that I could....
Flying and driving may not be the greatest contributors to global warming, but they are definitely the ones EVERY individual CAN do something about!
For me, buying the tree is like shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted, and it will have no effect on ameliorating the effects of global warming.
Do something that really makes a difference...use energy saving light bulbs, turn out the lights, and support and demand hydro and wind energy.
Stepping down off the soap box...apologies for the sermon, but it is my job to try!
___________________________________________________________________
Diamonds don't bling in the dark! - The Black Eyed Peas
Trouble is, you are making all these personal sacrifices, but your individual contribution will make no difference whatsoever. Indeed the UK ceasing to exist tomorrow would make no difference either: we are being taxed up the wazoo and subsidised to build carbon-neutral this, and eco-friendly that, but the carbon saving will be eaten by China in about 3 weeks.
Not only that, but your apocalyptic visions about the world imploding in 2050 have no basis in reality. In the 18th century they were saying the world would run out of food in the 19th. In the 70s they were talking of a second ice age and global cooling. It's all 'catastrophe tomorrow' predictions, but no sound basis other than vague projections based on hundreds of assumptions.
You've being conned.
Your lifelong sacrifice is a big one, and to what end?
The difference now is that there is broad consensus amongst the scientific community that peak oil is a fact. And when a world built on oil no longer has that oil something has to give.
Everything depends on oil, you cant believe that nothing is going to change when it dissappears.
global warming or not - big changes are ahead and we need to act.
Every turn of the pedal is an act of revolution!
Go by Bike!