49

Of course, it's better to emit less carbon, and support systems and policies that emit less carbon. That said, carbon emission is unavoidable, and I'd like to minimize that portion of my impact as much as possible.

I am definitely willing to pay to offset my carbon usage, but I'm under the impression that this is mostly a scam. Does anyone use these services? If so, can you tell me what reasoning or sources you used that satisfied you that the service your chose isn't a scam?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] hellweaver666@discuss.tchncs.de 91 points 8 months ago

Carbon offsets are a scam. John Oliver did a piece on them last year. Lots of it goes to existing forests (which doesn’t help offset new carbon usage) or to the development of mono-culture forests which have all sorts of issues.

[-] SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca 24 points 8 months ago

Good to know. Link for the lazy.

I wish there were some effective way to invest in fighting climate change. God knows there's plenty of money invested in the opposite direction.

[-] hellweaver666@discuss.tchncs.de 16 points 8 months ago

The way that I’m contributing is my reducing my own usage. I don’t drive a car (electric bike or public transport) I removed the gas supply from my house, signed up with a renewable energy supplier, insulated the ever living shit out of my house including triple glazed glass and installed a Heatpump. Cost a small fortune but I can say I put my money where my mouth is!

[-] darth_helmet@sh.itjust.works 4 points 8 months ago

Blow up a coal plant?

[-] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)
[-] hallettj@beehaw.org 16 points 8 months ago

I think the takeaway from that episode is that many carbon offsets are scams, not necessarily all. So don't take corporate claims that they offset their emissions at face value, and consider carefully before you buy offsets.

Take a look at my other comment about Wren and Wendover Productions. (This John Oliver episode happens to include an excerpt from the Wendover piece I mentioned.)

[-] deranger@sh.itjust.works 6 points 8 months ago

Forests do not offset carbon emissions unless the trees never decay. Unless you’re burying them underground after you cut them down, this method is not removing carbon from the atmosphere.

[-] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 5 points 8 months ago

Why does it need to be underground? If it's processed into lumber (for houses, etc) the carbon is still removed from the atmosphere, it's it not?

[-] Eheran@lemmy.world 1 points 8 months ago

Correct. As long as the wood is around, the CO2 is bound.

[-] deranger@sh.itjust.works 1 points 8 months ago

True, as long as that lumber never breaks down, it will be a carbon sink. You’d need to keep it from decomposing forever, however.

[-] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Yes. That's why they're a scam. They don't mean shit.

this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2023
49 points (88.9% liked)

Asklemmy

42432 readers
2908 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS