Carbon-negative

David

I'm wondering about all the products and waste new babies generate. The nappies, the toys, etc and then the kids as they grow get dropped off to school by four wheel tractors in Chelsea. If I don't have kids, can I have a few long-haul flights in return? I'm thinking Hong Kong and Brazil for the first 3 years of a babies life, probably even 1 flight a year i'd say. Considering I don't get away that much, surely I'm carbon neutral, possibly even negative _and_ helping the burdgeoning London population issues.

Pete

Are you saying we should eat babies?

ed

Minus babies = green trees

Liz

David, I fear not. Here's my basic maths (based on a combo of the climate care carbon calculator and carbonfootprint.org): Return flight for 2 to Hong Kong (assuming you're going with Petra): 5.62 Tonnes of CO2 Estimate of extra carbon usage for 2 small children (based on 20 extra miles per week in average family car plus c.£300 extra electricity pa for washing, heating, etc) = 1.3 Tonnes of CO2 I can't find a carbon calculator which factors in nappies, toys, extra food and so on, but even if you triple my initial estimate you're still not close to offsetting the long haul flight to Hong Kong. Brazil is only slightly cheaper (5.36 Tonnes).

David

Hmmm, see this is where all this Carbon neutral stuff starts to sound silly to me. i just whacked Heathrow-HK return for two into a calculator and it came up as 4.24 tonnes. Ok a bit of discrepancy with yours, Liz, but roughly same ballpark. The problem is it then suggests an offset voucher of £36 and 4 pence. Can you explain to me how £36 offsets having c.3 children? It seems most sites have a tonne of emmission around the tenner mark. If that's truly gonna save the world, then a couple of Bransons could do it tomorrow. There's some suggestions of the nappy/carbon use here: <http://www.carbon-clear.com/nappy_offset.php>;

Pete

There's been a lot said about "offset your carbon" claims, because most of them are tree-planting schemes.
If that was the answer we would have invaded brazil long ago.

I'm still wondering why there hasn't been any kind of air-scrubber designed yet, something that could simple take in air and filter it.
Or a bioengineered plant with massive co2 intake

Liz

I think that the better carbon offset schemes have now moved beyond tree planting to focussing on renewable/sustainable energy use, mainly in developing countries e.g. wind energy, more efficient stoves/cooking pots, etc. (That last one sounds like a joke but is apparently a very big issue because at the moment people cut down trees for fuel, so it's a double whammy of loss of tree + inefficient heating from a fire.) Ultimately though carbon offset can't be the whole solution (as David rightly points out) because you can't buy enough trees/wind farms in Africa/etc to offset all carbon production. Reduction is still the name of the game in the long run.

andy

There's also some debate about whether 'organic carbon' and 'fossil carbon' are really interchangeable. I can't vouch for the science either way, but it all points to the fact that offsetting is a temporary measure rather than a long term answer. <http://www.naturalcollection.com/organic/the-carbon-neutral-myth.asp>;