Discussions about global warming are usually considered overdone. The melting of icebergs in the Atlantic, the death of the polar bears and the threats of small islands vanishing under sea are nothing new. But how many people are actually aware of the extent of these threats of global warming? How many people and businesses are actually aware of their own contributions to global warming? How many people, businesses and governments are actually exerting efforts to minimize if not stop their contributions which are potentially harmful to the environment? And what could be those efforts?
Let’s talk about carbon offsets.
Big companies and businesses are the biggest contributors to global warming. However, while individual consumers’ effort to prevent further contribution to global warming such as minimizing the use of plastics or recycling and reusing of non- biodegradable materials would only mean a little of discomfort, forced reductions of greenhouse gas for businesses and companies would mean reduction of their profitable production. That is tantamount to losing in business. Reductions of greenhouse gas for them might include controlled frequency of travels via air and land, etc.
On the other hand, instead of us forcing companies and businesses to radical or impossible reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG), we can let them pay to reduce global GHG. This is how carbon offset comes in.
But how does carbon offset work?
Carbon offsets are measured in metric tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent (CO2e) and may represent six primary categories of greenhouse gases. One carbon offset represents the reduction of one metric ton of carbon dioxide or its equivalent in other greenhouse gases.
Offset companies first estimate a customer's personal carbon output. Their Web sites include carbon calculators that determine the total GHG produced by a year's worth of electricity or driving, an event or even a round-trip flight. Offset companies then charge an amount based on their own GHG price per ton. When you buy an offset, you fund projects that reduce GHG emissions. The projects might restore forests, update power plants and factories or increase the energy efficiency of buildings and transportation.
On the opposition side however, carbon offset is seen to encourage indulgence. It is a way for the guilty to pay for absolution rather than changing. According to English environmentalist George Monbiot, carbon offsets are an excuse for businesses as usual with regards to pollution.
The lack of regulation in the voluntary market is another issue. No standard governs the industry and some offset providers are even accused of exaggerating or misleading carbon reduction claims. For example, 1000 dollars offset used to fund the planting and growing of a 1000 trees in the Ecuador will be reported even if the trees died in two years.
With the above arguments given, thus the question; can carbon offset be the solution to global warming?
