Last week I blogged about the ideas I discussed in my latest column for offsets for environmental problems other than greenhouse gases, like litter and ozone depletion. My suggestions, like Aqua Net offsets for those with big hair (with the mandatory Donald Trump joke) were made tongue in cheek. Tom Elia has found an actual offset that can be purchased for something that never crossed my mind. Flatulence. Unbelievable.
Permalink | Linking Blogs | Sphere: Related Content | Digg this! | FARK It!
Filed under:
Global Warming
Comments (7)
I don't know about all of t... (Below threshold)1. Posted by yo | March 7, 2007 12:24 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I don't know about all of that. My dog (an 80+ lb, and growing, golden retriever) breaks wind all of the time, and my place isn't any warmer for it.
But, I may have to buy an offset to counter all of the air freshener I spray.
1. Posted by yo | March 7, 2007 12:24 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 7, 2007 12:24
2. Posted by Sheik Yur Bouty | March 7, 2007 12:28 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Thank Gaia I can finally make my a** carbon neutral!
2. Posted by Sheik Yur Bouty | March 7, 2007 12:28 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 7, 2007 12:28
3. Posted by hermie | March 7, 2007 12:35 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
This is suspicious.
I wonder if they are in the pockets of 'Big Bean'.
I demand an investigation of Bush....and Campbell's, and B&M.
3. Posted by hermie | March 7, 2007 12:35 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 7, 2007 12:35
4. Posted by JohnAnnArbor | March 7, 2007 1:12 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
The offset guys must be laughing as they rake in the cash. I'll bet 90% do nothing but take the money and set up a nice website.
4. Posted by JohnAnnArbor | March 7, 2007 1:12 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 7, 2007 13:12
5. Posted by wavemaker | March 7, 2007 2:36 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
yo has a point. Perhaps the harm is not so much the methane emissions as it is the chloro-flouro-carbons from the air fresheners.
5. Posted by wavemaker | March 7, 2007 2:36 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 7, 2007 14:36
6. Posted by Mac Lorry | March 7, 2007 6:01 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
The greenhouse effect of methane is 23 times greater than CO2, so the most effective means of limiting the damage to the environment is to burn methane at it's source. One way of doing this is the Blue Blazer method, but that might not be practical in all cases. The better approach would be to get Al Gore to invent catalytic underpants. A mesh of rare earth metals combined with thermocouples could not only eliminate methane but also supply enough electrical power to run a cell phone. Some folks may even be able to power a laptop, of a TV.
6. Posted by Mac Lorry | March 7, 2007 6:01 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 7, 2007 18:01
7. Posted by Veeshir | March 8, 2007 2:45 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
The Al Gore offset story got even funnier today. I'm sure you saw the Instapundit link where he notes that giving carbon credits is a perk.
So in other words, the Goracle doesn't pay for his own carbon credits.
But there's another angle that makes it even funnier. Since they're given out as perks, do you think the company then writes them off as a business expense and gives their employees a 1099 for that perk so they have to pay taxes for that "income"?
I certainly hope so. I mean, if you're going to be a cynical, hypocritical icehole, why not go whole hog?
7. Posted by Veeshir | March 8, 2007 2:45 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on March 8, 2007 14:45