02 May 2007

My latest newspaper column: carbon offsets

Count your carbon, then offset it

By Derek Larson, Times Writers Group

St. Cloud (MN) Times

Published: May 02. 2007 12:30AM

In recent months media coverage of climate change has been so widespread that it's begun to make up for the decade of silence that helped make the United States one of the few industrialized nations not to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. While the rest of the world wonders how Americans can abide the willful ignorance of their national leaders, meaningful responses to the threat of climate change are emerging on the state, municipal, corporate and even individual levels. As the old saying goes "when the people lead, the leaders will follow."

So where are the people leading? To state programs that regulate carbon and establish markets to trade emission permits. To cities that have committed to reducing their emissions and are investing in public transportation and alternative energy. To corporate plans to develop cleaner technologies and venture capitalists backing alternative energy startups. And certainly not least, to regular citizens who are doing their part to address climate change by learning about their carbon impacts and taking action to reduce them.

Individual efforts

The basic steps for individuals concerned about reducing carbon emissions are well known and essentially boil down to "use less gas and less electricity," because transport fuels and household energy use account for the lion's share of our individual impacts.

The next step is to learn about the carbon impact of your regular purchases and shop accordingly: Buy locally grown foods rather than produce from California, U.S.-made goods rather than imports from China, and products from companies with sustainability practices instead of those from environmental black hats.

If you've taken these essential measures and are still frustrated by the lack of action from Washington, there are two more things you can do: Call your senator and representative to demand federal action on climate change, and consider buying carbon offsets.

Offsets

So what's a carbon offset? Quite simply, it is a way to negate the impact of carbon emissions you can't avoid.

We all need electricity for light and fuel for heat, most of us need transportation, and it's hard to get through a Minnesota winter without buying some food from other regions. All of these activities produce carbon that helps make the United States the world's largest contributor to climate change.

Carbon offsets are essentially a way to purchase "negative carbon" by supporting activities that reduce carbon which would have been generated by others. They are marketed by dozens of companies, both for- and nonprofit, and support an array of solutions from wind farms to methane digesters, reforestation projects to solar installations.

Determining your carbon footprint is easy. Sites such as www.carboncounter.org and www.carbonfund.org will help calculate emissions.

For example, Carbonfund's calculator estimates a family of four living in St. Cloud, with gas heat and driving 15,000 miles per year in two vehicles averaging 25 mpg, would generate about 22 tons of CO2 from those activities in year. The cost of offsetting those emissions would be about $110, less than $10 a month, and the money would be invested in activities that permanently prevent the same amount of carbon from being emitted elsewhere.

It's simple, cheap, and — for now — the best way to reduce the impact of activities we can't avoid, such as lighting and heating homes and driving to work or school.

Congress and industry both favor establishing a market that will set carbon prices through a national cap-and-trade system, so the cost of carbon offsets will be reflected in the prices of everything we buy. But until that day arrives, individuals can explore carbon offsetting themselves simply by Googling "carbon offsets" or though such resources as "The Consumer's Guide to Retail Carbon Offset Providers."

Before long our leaders will wake up, pull their heads from the sand and pat themselves on the backs for solving the climate crisis. The least we can do then is say "I told you so."

"I told you so" is getting easier to say to FDA

Today the FDA reported that millions of people have likely consumed chickens that were fed melamine-tainted pet food after the recall. How can anyone trust the FDA if they allow poison pet food to be recalled and then sold to chicken farmers as feed? Apparently the unregulated Chinese producers have intentionally added melamine to their protein products because it gives falsely high readings of protein content, which means higher prices. Heads should roll at FDA and consumers should treat any food imported from China as suspect...but there's no way to know where tainted Chinese ingredients might end up without the FDA doing its job.

See CNN's report Feds: Millions have eaten chickens fed tainted pet food

29 April 2007

Reluctant "I Told You So" on Poison Food

Back on April 4th my newspaper column on the pet food scare warned that the tainted melamine could end up in the human food supply, and suggested the FDA has been lax in its oversight. Today's news wire reports say it's happened...though not as directly as I'd imagined. Through an even more ridiculous route, the tainted pet food was recalled, then apparently sold to hog farmers to fed it to their stock. Those hogs were eventually slaughtered and the pork that went to market is tainted with-- you guessed it --melamine from China.

It would be funny if it wasn't so scary. How long will it be before low-cost, unregulated, and uninspected food imports from China end up killing someone's child? It's time to overhaul the FDA and get it off the corporate agenda and back into the role of protecting our citizens.