Slashdot Mirror


FTC Offput by Offsets

theodp writes "US corporations and shoppers spent more than $54M last year on credits toward tree planting, wind farms, solar plants and other projects, prompting the FTC to question whether carbon-offset money is well spent. 'There's a heightened potential for deception,' said FTC Chairwoman Deborah Platt Majoras of the green-sounding offers that seem to be confronting consumers at every turn."

4 of 225 comments (clear)

  1. That's accountable though! by StefanJ · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You could have a whole industry of finger-pointers and fact checkers looking into the effectiveness of offset claims.

    The example of green server farms doesn't strike me as ludicrous or faddish. It's really easy to measure things like power consumption.

    Siting would in part determine where the power is coming from. You could also do cool things like setting up in a northern state that gets lots of snow, and use ice ponds to assist the air conditioning.

    It's conceivable that big farms could invest in local alternative energy plants as a way of stabilizing long-term costs and priority during shortages.

    You could back up wind power with an investment in "methane farming" at a local landfill. Methane could be stored and "burned" in a fuel cell stack when the grid or wind farm can't supply cheap and/or "green" juice.

  2. Re:All Hogwash! by CajunArson · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Please present some actual evidence for everything you just said, and some conspiracy-nut eco-lobbying website does not count. I grew up in Pennsylvania, home of Three Mile Island. If you had been standing at the exhaust vent where the (minute) amount of radiation was released and had been intentionally trying to suck down everything from the accident, you would have received LESS radiation than if you had hidden out in your basement in Harrisburg for 3 months following the accident... you know why? Radon! There has never been anything even approaching evidence that this "accident" ever injured anyone, and that is the worst-case scenario of anything that GE has ever been involved int.

          If anything I'd say you are in on the scam and are trying to scare people into "saving the earth" by lining your own pocketbook while the US destroys its economy and China pollutes all it wants since somehow dirty coal burned in China is "green" but clean nuclear power in the US is terrible.

    --
    AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
  3. Sunday Creek Coal Mine - Ohio by Sanat · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The water source for the Glouster, Ohio area is gotten from Burr Oak Lake which is man made here in the Appalachians. A dam was placed across a valley and made this huge lake.

    People would drive from 15 - 20 miles away with containers to gather the water for drinking because it was so pure.

    When the coal mine started producing coal approx 8 years ago all of the tailings would wash from Sunday creek area into the Lake and now it is dangerous to even drink the water because of all of the impurities.

    What did the coal company do about it? They bought some of these "free passes"

    So now that the coal mine is closed and another is now opened about 3 miles further up the road.

    And residences of Glouster, Trimble, Jacksonville, and Burr Oak now have tainted water for ever.

    The "Free Pass" is just the cost of doing business for the big companies and has nothing to do with the local residence to whom the coal company should feel responsible for fixing what they broke.

    --
    And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make
  4. Re:disgusting by OakLEE · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Even with unlimited, clean energy, growth still leaves an environmental footprint. Increases in population demand more food, and more living space, both of which would involve expansion into unsettled habitats (e.g., cutting down the rain forests, developing grasslands).

    The Dark Greens, who would prefer to not see any this destruction of habitat occur. Unlimited energy however would make expansion into undeveloped habitats cheap, and therefore easier and more likely. Thus, as a sect of the environmental movement that primarily favors preserving undeveloped territory (over reducing pollution), Dark Greens by necessity would have to be opposed to finding cheap, clean, unlimited energy.

    I surmise that they would much rather see energy prices skyrocket, and no new sources be developed. This would necessitate a worldwide Powerdown scenario, which would effectively halt, if not at least dramatically slow, worldwide growth. Only after this state, would their vision of society be palpable to the masses. In a nutshell, they are eco-Marxists.

    --
    The sun beams down on a brand new day, No more welfare tax to pay, Unsightly slums gone up in flashing light...