Buying flight carbon offsets

[Orale 1087]

I like to think of myself as a fairly eco-conscious person. But the truth is I love to travel and fly as often as I can, most frequently abroad. So I'm basically one of the worst individual polluters in the world based on air miles flown annually (for fun and not work). I use trains and buses almost exclusively when abroad, but of course flying from the U.S. requires traveling thousands of miles by air.

I read recently about buying carbon offsets for an equivalent share of carbon produced on individual flights from various charities online. Some sites say this is performative bullshit that has no actual effect on the environment beyond helping frequent traveling progressives assuage their liberal guilt. Any thoughts on it?

Edited June 27, 2021 by Orale

[Incredulity 11683]

7 minutes ago, Orale said:

Some sites say this is performative bullshit that has no actual effect on the environment beyond helping frequent traveling progressives assuage their liberal guilt.

Bingo

[Orale 1087]

8 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

Bingo

Fair nuff.

[deadshank 24653]

Keep your money in your pocket. 

[Baboontyme 2825]

How does fight carbon compare to Klose

[DoobieWah 1462]

For $1000, I will plant a tree for you in my yard and over the course of its lifetime you can offset the  drive to the airport for your next vacation. PM me for my Venmo. 

[gmr548 16617]

It can’t hurt if you make a point to find a legit program but nothing is actually a 1:1 offset. And some are just garbage. The best way to reduce your carbon footprint from flying is to fly less.

[HeHateMe 888]

You flying private? Cause if not I’m pretty sure that bird will still be in the air, with or without you.  

[RollLeft 5045]

8 hours ago, DoobieWah said:

For $950 1000, I will plant a tree for you in my yard and over the course of its lifetime you can offset the  drive to the airport for your next vacation. PM me for my Venmo. 

fify

[52-80 19254]

lol isn't carbon offset just gamified by landowners in the developing world to deforest otherwise-unused land, so they could plant more shit and capture the monetary credit. 

[troph 24910]

There are some legit companies but a racket for the most part. Even the legit ones beg them question how does planting a tree or bringing better cooking stoves to papa New Guinea really offset a jet plane exhaust. That said I do give a few bucks a month to terrapass. After some research they seemed like the best fit for me. 

[ChickenSandwich 9853]

Best bet is to stop all air travel until electric planes are ready. 

[Guest]

27 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

Best bet is to stop all air travel until electric planes are ready. 

won't the cords get tangled?

[wild_turkey 3182]

If carbon offsets are purely bullshit, then what specifically are the airlines doing with the money? It would seem to me that at least within the U.S. there are regulations that prevent a major domestic airline from advertising and selling something only to not do what they say and merely pocket the money. Maybe I’m naive but there are restrictions on everything else in that industry.

[ChickenSandwich 9853]

The airlines don’t control the carbon offset market, they never claimed to be planting the trees. 
 

There are some videos on the carbon offset exchange market and how they are bought and sold through the world. 
 

As always, someone is getting rich. 
Great Idea = Business = Racket 

Edited October 12, 2021 by ChickenSandwich

[troph 24910]

29 minutes ago, wild_turkey said:

If carbon offsets are purely bullshit, then what specifically are the airlines doing with the money? It would seem to me that at least within the U.S. there are regulations that prevent a major domestic airline from advertising and selling something only to not do what they say and merely pocket the money. Maybe I’m naive but there are restrictions on everything else in that industry.

I don’t think they are purely bullshit. I think you have to be careful, I think some are crooks, others mean well but can’t execute the business plan well and only a few do it right.  Even when done right we need more and less not more to offset more.  But hey no one is going to truly fly less so it’s what we’ve got.

[wild_turkey 3182]

I skimmed a few articles and this one from TPG seems to give a pretty good breakdown:

https://thepointsguy.com/guide/everything-you-need-to-know-carbon-offsetting-flights/

It seems like many of the programs are at least semi-legit. Maybe the bad ones could be compared to a bad charity, in the sense that your money isn’t being used as effectively as you would hope, and there are inevitably middle men getting a piece of the pie. At the same time, some of them seem like they are actually decent programs with tangible outcomes.

A recent flight I booked had carbon offsets for $10/person. I would assume that out of that $10, around $5-8 of it goes towards planting mangrove trees in Central America or something like that. Surely part of it pays someone’s salary at the airline, and maybe the mangrove tree company is a for-profit organization, but at the end of the day, some money is going towards a forestry project that wouldn’t happen otherwise. It seems like that something is better than nothing.

Now perhaps a more discerning person would research 3rd party carbon offset organizations and find one with a good reputation and specific measurable outcomes, which could be a more efficient use of the money. But we’re talking about $10 here.

Although maybe if I average $10 x 2 people x 20 flights/year, then that’s $400 annually. So maybe instead of small incremental contributions, it would be worthwhile to just find a program I like and make yearly contributions. I’m about to go down a rabbit hole I guess.

[ChickenSandwich 9853]

3 minutes ago, wild_turkey said:

I skimmed a few articles and this one from TPG seems to give a pretty good breakdown:

https://thepointsguy.com/guide/everything-you-need-to-know-carbon-offsetting-flights/

It seems like many of the programs are at least semi-legit. Maybe the bad ones could be compared to a bad charity, in the sense that your money isn’t being used as effectively as you would hope, and there are inevitably middle men getting a piece of the pie. At the same time, some of them seem like they are actually decent programs with tangible outcomes.

A recent flight I booked had carbon offsets for $10/person. I would assume that out of that $10, around $5-8 of it goes towards planting mangrove trees in Central America or something like that. Surely part of it pays someone’s salary at the airline, and maybe the mangrove tree company is a for-profit organization, but at the end of the day, some money is going towards a forestry project that wouldn’t happen otherwise. It seems like that something is better than nothing.

Now perhaps a more discerning person would research 3rd party carbon offset organizations and find one with a good reputation and specific measurable outcomes, which could be a more efficient use of the money. But we’re talking about $10 here.

Although maybe if I average $10 x 2 people x 20 flights/year, then that’s $400 annually. So maybe instead of small incremental contributions, it would be worthwhile to just find a program I like and make yearly contributions. I’m about to go down a rabbit hole I guess.

Look into the details of the Paris Accords.  Many details about creating a carbon offset stock market., follow the money (and who's money would be needed/used to seed this new market) ...

[troph 24910]

24 minutes ago, wild_turkey said:

I skimmed a few articles and this one from TPG seems to give a pretty good breakdown:

https://thepointsguy.com/guide/everything-you-need-to-know-carbon-offsetting-flights/

It seems like many of the programs are at least semi-legit. Maybe the bad ones could be compared to a bad charity, in the sense that your money isn’t being used as effectively as you would hope, and there are inevitably middle men getting a piece of the pie. At the same time, some of them seem like they are actually decent programs with tangible outcomes.

A recent flight I booked had carbon offsets for $10/person. I would assume that out of that $10, around $5-8 of it goes towards planting mangrove trees in Central America or something like that. Surely part of it pays someone’s salary at the airline, and maybe the mangrove tree company is a for-profit organization, but at the end of the day, some money is going towards a forestry project that wouldn’t happen otherwise. It seems like that something is better than nothing.

Now perhaps a more discerning person would research 3rd party carbon offset organizations and find one with a good reputation and specific measurable outcomes, which could be a more efficient use of the money. But we’re talking about $10 here.

Although maybe if I average $10 x 2 people x 20 flights/year, then that’s $400 annually. So maybe instead of small incremental contributions, it would be worthwhile to just find a program I like and make yearly contributions. I’m about to go down a rabbit hole I guess.

I pay terrapass $50/month. That was the solution I landed on after my own rabbit hole journey.

[EE2B 1565]

Tor has some trees he is trying to give away that will help offset any carbon emissions you might have.

[wild_turkey 3182]

3 hours ago, ChickenSandwich said:

Look into the details of the Paris Accords.  Many details about creating a carbon offset stock market., follow the money (and who's money would be needed/used to seed this new market) ...

It seems like you are making a vague assertion without anything tangible to substantiate it. You disagree with part of the Paris Accords (or possibly the entire premise, I'm not sure), therefore, any other efforts to have a positive impact on climate change must be tainted and corrupt. That's a big leap in logic without some major gaps being filled in.