This Scam Was Forseen

As the wealthy and various companies seek to buy their way to carbon neutrality, thus proving their concern for the welfare of the planet and improving their status among the worshipers of the Goracle, the Financial Times has conducted an investigation of organizations that peddle 'ecological indulgences," as Charles Krauthammer calls them. These organizations have been found wanting, succeeding only in cashing in on the consciences of the rich in a lucrative green "gold mine." This whole scam was forseen by Krauthammer, who described some of the practices of carbon offsetting companies.

Here are some of the Financial Times findings:

■ Widespread instances of people and organisations buying worthless credits that do not yield any reductions in carbon emissions.

■ Industrial companies profiting from doing very little – or from gaining carbon credits on the basis of efficiency gains from which they have already benefited substantially.

■ Brokers providing services of questionable or no value.

■ A shortage of verification, making it difficult for buyers to assess the true value of carbon credits.

■ Companies and individuals being charged over the odds for the private purchase of European Union carbon permits that have plummeted in value because they do not result in emissions cuts.

The FT article mentions how some companies are working on their own in-house carbon offsetting, rather than trusting a separate entity to wash away their globally wasteful and polluting sins. This would make more sense, as concern for the environment should be personal and not shoved off to some profiteering third party.

Something to Crow about!

Well, Sheryl Crow is having another media moment by suggesting the restriction of toilet paper usage as a way to save the planet. If every Hollywood star were to start restricting their toilet paper usage, do you think it will make a significant difference in the lives of polar bears and penguins? Probably not.

Why don't those celebrities who, in their self importance, want to do something for the planet choose to take the Personal Energy Ethics Pledge:


This is the same pledge former Vice President Al Gore refused to sign when Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla) presented it to him during his sermon at the Washington Global Warming Hearing.

I doubt if those Hollywood celebrities would dare lower themselves from their luxurious lifestyles to make a significant change for the sake of the planet. Instead, they can assuage their guilt for their wasteful lifestyles by purchasing more carbon credits in the hope of saving their environmental soul.

Personal Energy Ethics Pledge

Here is the document that Al Gore refuses to sign. This pledge was presented to Al Gore by Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) during yesterday's global warming hearing.


Like I mentioned in my previous post, Ecological Indulgences, those like Gore seek to offset their energy usage by buying into the carbon credit scam to ease their consciences. If this country is going to make real change toward the use of alternative fuel sources, wind bags like Gore have to "lead the way. " Until they do, they have no credibility in my books. As for me, I will personally do my part to use energy wisely.

Ecological Indulgences

"Ecological Indulgences" That's what Charles Krauthammer called the practice of the rich buying "carbon credits" in offset their wasteful lifestyles. God forbid the wealthy actually ride a bus to get anywhere, or turn off their heated pools, or sweat at any time except when they work out on their expensively produced and energy consuming exercise equipment! Perish the though of Gore cutting back the energy consumption of his own home (one month's energy bill for him is about 20 times one of our energy bills for a YEAR).

The Carbon Credit business is a total scam that is thriving on the guilt of the wealthy. They can somehow "buy" their way out of global warming. HA! All the while the real work of ecological change is being done by those who live the simplest - the poor. It's hard to waste energy when you can't afford to keep your lights on for long. It's mighty hard to blow horrible carbon dioxide into the atmosphere when you can't even afford a car and have to walk, bike, or ride a bus everywhere.

Krauthammer's article also demonstrates the negative effect "carbon credits" have on developing countries, citing the forcible taking of farmland so "carbon credit" trees can be planted. From the article:

GreenSeat, a Dutch carbon-trading outfit, buys offsets from a foundation that plants trees in Uganda's Mount Elgon National Park to soak up the carbon emissions of its rich Western patrons. Small problem: expanding the park encroaches on land traditionally used by local farmers. As a result, reports the New York Times, "villagers living along the boundary of the park have been beaten and shot at, and their livestock has been confiscated by armed park rangers." All this so that swimming pools can be heated and Maseratis driven with a clear conscience in the fattest parts of the world.

The liberal infatuation with environmentalism is proving to be a hypocrisy. And why should concern about the environment be an exclusively liberal issue. I'm an unabashed conservative - in our household we use a wood stove for heat so we don't burn too many dinosaurs, we ride our bikes, live simply and are not consumed by greed and "keeping up with the Jone's". My kids don't vegetate in front of video games, nor are they inoculated from life by i-pods and other such devices. We use an energy efficient evaporative cooling system, and recycle cans. All this while the liberal wealthy purchase and travel to excess and buy 'carbon credits' to "offset" their indulgent lifestyles.

If they want to spend their money on excesses, let them go ahead. But puh-leeze don't put on the self righteous pall of concern about the environment while you do. BE HONEST!