Debunking the myths of Carbon Footprints, Carbon Offsetting and Green Energy Tariffs

Carbon Footprints, Carbon Offsetting and Green Energy Tariffs are all terms that have been hijacked by commercial organisations to lure us into buying their products as they are ‘greener’ that anyone else’s. Here’s why we should all question the rash claims made.

Carbon Footprints: We know that this is a metaphorical representation of how much carbon we use. But the truth of the matter is that there is no way of truly measuring how much carbon we use, as all have unique lives that will use all manner of carbon-based energy that we have no control the original source of the energy. Without this control, we have no way of knowing how the energy was extracted, whether it was extracted efficiently, and therefore its carbon content. Most homes have gas and electricity, and run at least one car. Every time you fill up at a different fuel station you are changing the ‘source’. Every time you shop at a different shop, eat at a different restaurant, or drink in a different pub, you will be directly or indirectly consuming differing sources of energy. So let’s assume that you can track all the different providers that you come into contact with. How would you calculate the carbon content of the fuel expended? You may say that this doesn’t matter because Carbon Footprint is only designed to give you an indication of the relative use of energy. Fair point, except that where we’re being encouraged to offset Carbon, how can you truly do this if you don’t truly know how much Carbon you’re using?

Carbon Offsetting: Let’s assume that we can measure the amount of Carbon used. Should you offset? Well, yes of course it helps, but there are two issues. Offsetting doesn’t not discourage waste, or encourage efficiency; it simply salves your conscience. Also if everyone were to offset there wouldn’t be anywhere to put all the trees, and as it doesn’t encourage energy preservation, the planet will still run out of oil millions of years before any trees planted will yield some fresh supplies. Many companies make claims to be Carbon Neutral to impress us into thinking they are green, and good to do business with. I would say that this would be very, very, difficult to prove, so it’s a hollow claim.

Green Energy Tariffs
Many power companies are offering ‘green energy’. Usually at a premium. This may give you the impression that your energy is coming from renewable sources but the reality is that your power will be coming from the same old carbon powered station that it always has, you’ll just be paying more for it! You could argue that this doesn’t matter because the extra money that we are paying is being invested in renewables. But the reality is that it means that we are paying for the research and development budgets of already rich companies that should be funding and securing their own futures from the billions of pounds of profit that they already make.

The only way to reduce our carbon footprints is to use less energy and be more energy efficient. Period. Don't believe the hype.

Team Green: The green test

Politicians will make claims as to their green credentials. Sadly there claims don't hold up to much scrutiny. Here's some food for thought. Cooking oil, after use can be filtered and cleaned up then used in diesel vehicles. We have a large number of restaurants and food outlets that throw away their oil, which is also problematic to cleanly dispose of. For a commercial organisation to arrange to collect, process and then sell this onto us is unviable because Mr Darling insists on the same level of fuel duty that applies to petroleum based diesel. By reducing the tax burden we can recycle an otherwise spent product, preserve oil, and help motorists. But think of the bigger picture; if the government were to organise collection and distribution it could create jobs and if the fuel were used to power public service vehicles the savings could lower our council tax bills. Not much effort but plenty of benefits. So why doesn't it happen? Politicians live in the pockets of the oil barons, and depend too much on the tax revenues oil brings. So if a politician claims to be green, the only I suppose they are... well Greenbacks anyhow.

July 10th, Team Green Britain Day

I couldn't let this pass now could I? July the 10th is National Green Day, so why not spend it thinking about making your time on this planet a little more green? Being green is not just about saving the planet, but about saving money too, so unless you have too much money read on... I'll spare you all the usual stuff like turn down your heating, re-use your shopping bags and buy energy saving light bulbs (but never-the-less you should do this!). Think about your car. Think about the weight. Now think about the petrol or diesel. Fuel is heavy. Not only should you strip any unnecessary items out of your boot, think about only ever half filling your tank. The weight saving will make your car much more economical. Save water from baths to water the garden or flush the toilet. Make sure your fridge and freezer aren't cooler than they need to be, and (5°C/-18°C), and that they are well defrosted. Make sure they're situated in the coolest place they can be. I'll finish by being a bit more radical. Why not try a carbon-free evening. Turn, off the lights, and the TV and so on. Spend the evening by candle-light, reading, playing cards, or heaven forbid, having a conversation. Do this once a week for a 14% energy reduction, and who knows, you might even discover the lost art of talking. What have you got to lose!

http://www.teamgreenbritain.org/special-reports

Public Transport - National(ised) Express

So National Express' beacon franchise is to revert to ownership by you and me. Interesting. To anyone that can't remember why the railways were nationalised in the first place after the 2nd world war, I'd like to remind you of the prime motivation. The railways were not making money, and the firms that ran them were going bust hand quicker than an express train on the High Speed Rail Link. The government of the day stepped in because Public Transport was seen as a key service. Like buses and trams, it was seen that these services should be subsidised with public money to ensure that everyone had access to cheap travel. In the 1990's post Thatcherism economics convinced the government of the day that there was money to be made in them there railways. Mmmm. However, in order to get the Dragons of the day to be 'in' the government had to offer subsidies to these commercial companies, who in return would improve the service. There are two flaws here. Firstly it means that you and I are subsidising the profits, and therefore the dividends paid to the shareholders of those commercial companies. Secondly, it means that as the franchises to run the lines, go to the highest bidder, the railway companies have to recover all this from the fare paying public. So what makes great sense for the government, means higher fares for you and I. Mmmm. But here's the double whammy. Those higher fares mean that it's cheaper to drive. How can that be right. Back in the day, public transport was reckoned to be cheap and accessible. Recently I travelled from Wellingborough to St. Albans, which is about 50 miles. It cost nearly £25, off peak. This journey would have cost about £5 in fuel for me to make. This of course takes no account of the cost of the bus to get to the train station, or the ludicrous cost of parking at the station had I driven. To run salt further into the public transport wound, it would have been a lot quicker by car too, as well as more comfortable. Travelling by car is a no brainer. Jimmy Saville once said "Let the train take the strain", nowadays, can your wallet take the strain. How can this be good for the environment when it's cheaper and more convenient to take the car? If this, or any future government is to grasp the green nettle then it must address this.