DEM CONVENTION OFFSETS: MISUNDERSTOOD ANSWER TO CLIMATE QUESTION

The 5000 delegates to the Democratic National Convention have been asked to spend $7.50 each to offset their greenhouse gas emissions (GhGs). When delegates to a national presidential convention are asked to consider “offsetting” their GhGs, it is time to think about “offsets.”

The idea is controversial and easily satirized.

Susan Innis, program manager, Colorado state own carbon fund (launching in August): "The most common criticism is that they are not a panacea for global warming…To some, it's like cheatneutral. Pay a couple to be faithful to offset your own infidelity."

Just because something is not a panacea does not mean it is a joke. If anything and everything satirized was unworthy of serious consideration, nothing would be worthy of serious consideration.

A legitimate offset means a unit of GhGs that would otherwise have been generated is not. That unit of GhGs would do irreversible harm and paying to prevent it is worthwhile.

If it is not clear how that is different than paying somebody else to respect their partner while you disrespect yours, seek spiritual guidance.

That offsets are imperfect and subject to abuse only means there is an opportunity for 3rd party oversight like that obtained by NativeEnergy, the official offsetting agency for the Democrats.

Billy Connelly, marketing director, NativeEnergy: "It's a big deal for NativeEnergy and for the DNCC…They're demonstrating that they walk the talk, that they reduce their impact on the environment and then offset the inevitable remainder of carbon that's going to be created by the convention."

Offsets are controversial. Even respected agencies like NativeEnergy are challenged when they refuse to disclose financial details no other business would even be asked to disclose. Tufts Climate Initiative lists NativeEnergy among “the companies we liked best” but Carbon Catalog puts it far down the list.

Lori Bird, senior energy analyst, National Renewable Energy Laboratory: "It's a really young field that took off before the (regulatory) infrastructure could catch up."

These are the questions experts (at Rocky Mountain News) recommend asking:

(1) Have emissions been cut everywhere possible (turn down the thermostat, insulating the house, take the bus)?
(2) Who is the offset seller and how is the seller ranked (for quality of offsets, transparency to consumers, etc.)? (Check Green-e, Carbon Catalog, Tufts Climate Initiative, etc.)
(3) Is the offset generated from New Energy or tree planting and is it verifiable and sustainable?
(4) Is the offset verified by an independent third party?
(5) Is the offset listed in a formal registry so it will not be sold again?

The implications of the questions are clear. Offsets are still not adequately regulated. Abuses are possible. Caveat emptor (Buyer beware).

And step back a moment. Thinking about offsets means thinking about climate change. It means thinking about personal actions and putting the elimination of GhGs ahead of everything else. It means funneling money to New Energy and tree planting.

All much better ideas than paying for the privilege of disrespecting and betraying yourself and someone’s faith in you.

NativeEnergy will offsets for the Dems. (click to enlarge)

Bet on carbon offsets; Green challenge aimed at clean energy sources
Jerd Smith, July 26, 2008 (Rocky Mountain News)

WHO
The Democratic National Committee; Delegates from all 50 states to the convention;

WHAT
- The Democratic National Convention's Green Delegate Challenge calls on all delegates to “offset” the greenhouse gas emissions from their participation (travel and consumption) by the purchase of “credits.”

click to enlarge

WHEN
- The Democratic National Convention will be August 25 thru 28.
- The concept of offsetting has emerged in the last ~5 years along with the growing awareness of global climate change and the only controllable causal agent, GhGs.
- 2007: Congress held hearings on developing offset oversight.

WHERE
- The Democratic National Convention will be in Denver, CO.
- Delegates from 37 states have volunteered to participate.
- 4 states have all delegates enrolled.
- NativeEnergy is based in Vermont.

WHY
- Carbon offsets are designed to put marketplace principles to work on GhG reduction.
- NativeEnergy found 4 projects for the DNC’s Green Delegate Challenge: (1) a wind turbine in Wray, CO; (2) a turbine in rural Minnesota; (3) a methane digester fueled with farm animal waste in Pennsylvania; (4) a methane digester fueled by landfill gas in Iowa.
- Each benefits a local community, brings emissions-free electricity to the grid, and each project has a 25-year power-purchase agreement.
- The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is in the process of writing rules for offsets.

Offsetting is NOT about absolving guilt - it's about doing something constructive instead of doing nothing but ridiculing those who are making a difference. (click to enlarge)

QUOTES
- Gideon Greenspan, entrepreneur-operator, Carbon Catalog: "I created the catalog because I had begun buying offsets for myself and found the process incredibly frustrating…There were a lot of providers out there, but assessing how good or bad they were, there just wasn't a lot of information."
- Billy Connelly, marketing director, NativeEnergy: "We're extremely transparent…The only thing we're not disclosing are our financials. Greenspan is one guy. He doesn't have a lot of credibility…[Tufts University Climate Initiative ranks NativeEnergy in its top tier] because of our transparency, our disclosure and the types of projects we use…"
- John Suthers, Attorney General, state of Colorado: "There is no question that carbon offsets are the new frontier in consumer protection because there are no specific rules that pertain to them…I suspect that if you analyzed the Colorado population," Suthers said, "we're probably more environmentally responsible as a whole. But a lot of people won't take the time to see if the offsets they're buying have the transparency that is needed or the verification that is needed."