
At some point in time, it seems logical that the name of the Democrat Party must be changed to the Do As I Say, Not As I Do Party.
In another fine example of such hypocrisy, it appears that despite claims by Al Gore that all of the CO2 emitted into the air as a result of the production of his schlockumentary "An Inconvenient Truth" were offset with carbon credits, nothing can be further from the truth.
As Steve Milloy reported Thursday (emphasis added throughout):
The movie's producers, Paramount Classics and Participant Productions, announced that they purchased offsets from broker NativeEnergy to compensate for 100 percent of the CO2 emissions from the air and ground transportation, hotel use, and production and promotional activities associated with the movie.
Here was their June 6, 2006 announcement, which was also posted at the film's website (emphasis added):
Paramount Classics, Participant Productions, and NativeEnergy have joined forces to offset 100% of the carbon dioxide emissions from air and ground transportation and hotels for production and promotional activities associated with the documentary "AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH" making the film the first carbon-neutral documentary ever.
[...]
NativeEnergy, which works with individuals and organizations to help them compensate for their contributions to global warming, calculated the "carbon footprint" from producing "AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH," including all travel, office, and accommodations related emissions. The company then offset emissions through renewable energy credits or "green tags" from new renewable energy projects. Paramount Classics and Participant will split the cost of these tags; the funds will go towards helping build new Native American, Alaskan Native Village, and farmer-owned renewable energy projects, creating sustainable economies for communities in need and diversifying our energy supply.
Well, how much did they buy? According to Milloy, not much:
According to a Web site release from NativeEnergy - which has since been removed - it only cost 40 tons of offsets (worth about $480) to make "An Inconvenient Truth" carbon neutral.
It's an absurdly low figure given that the making of a 30-second television commercial can easily produce 50 tons and the movie "Syriana" - another NativeEnergy project - was supposedly offset with 2,040 tons worth of offsets.
Hmmm. So, a 30-second commercial produces 50 tons of CO2, and "Syriana" producers bought 2,040 tons of credits to offset that film's emissions.
Yet, the movie that brought this whole concept into the limelight only offset its carbon output with 40 tons of credits?
How delicious. All together now, "Do As I Say, Not As I Do!"
Yet, there's more:
As recently reported on the left-wing web site Grist.org (http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/6/19/123649/857), it's worthwhile asking whether carbon offsets are offsetting anything at all.
According to the Grist article, NativeEnergy is selling offsets that are supposed to be helping to pay for wind-generated electricity supplied by the Alaska Village Electric Cooperative (AVEC) to 52 Alaskan villages.
When the Grist reporter first interviewed an AVEC official, the money received from NativeEnergy was described as a "bonus" - a potential problem given that the agreement between AVEC and NativeEnergy requires that the offsets are "a significant contributor to economic viability and the seller's efforts to build additional wind capacity." AVEC and NativeEnergy have since backed off the "bonus" characterization, according to the Grist article.
While acknowledging the possibility of a slip of the tongue on the part of the AVEC official, the Grist reporter raised the salient point - presumably because of the black box-nature of CO2 offsets - that we will never actually know whether the offsets purchased through NativeEnergy were used to produce any wind power or reduce any CO2 emissions.
Adding it all up, it is quite questionable whether any of the efforts of these supposedly green producers did anything to "offset" the CO2 production involved in creating this film. Of course, that's if you even buy into this whole carbon credit scam in the first place.
Can you imagine the media stink this would be generating if Al Gore and Laurie David were Republicans?
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
"...Offset by carbon
July 23, 2007 - 12:48 ET by Chris Norman"...Offset by carbon credits"?
Is this a different version of "The check's in the mail"?
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
No it's the new "I'm from
July 23, 2007 - 12:52 ET by Challenger GrimNo it's the new "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you."
Be sure to get your daily Fred Thompson Fact!
Both you guys want to try . .
July 23, 2007 - 12:57 ET by FastEdTrust Me.
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
Don't you mean...
July 23, 2007 - 13:02 ET by Challenger GrimTrust me.
Be sure to get your daily Fred Thompson Fact!
Or, perhaps, the AGW
July 23, 2007 - 20:23 ET by MikeBOr, perhaps, the AGW equivalent of "Of course I'll respect you in the morning!" Which, of course, when passed through the BS filter comes out: "In the morning? I don't even respect you now!"
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
Get Your Red-Hot Carbon Credits!
July 23, 2007 - 13:06 ET by Free StinkerSpeaking of Carbon Credits, how much do I get for planting 3 trees?
Anyone interested in purchasing these fine Carbon Credits? They're less filling, and they taste great too! ;-)
_______
Fred Thompson and Ann Coulter walk into a bar. The bar is instantly destroyed because that much awesome cannot be contained in one build
}}}----> Carbon Credits
July 23, 2007 - 13:13 ET by Cool ArrowAs Jeffrey Dahmer said to Lurena Bobbitt: "you gonna eat that"?
Planting Japanese trees
July 23, 2007 - 13:31 ET by Roger the ShrubberPlanting Japanese trees because they will grow whereas American trees will not?
Or because it will look cool
July 23, 2007 - 13:34 ET by Free StinkerOr because it will look cool in the front yard . . .
_______
Fred Thompson and Ann Coulter walk into a bar. The bar is instantly destroyed because that much awesome cannot be contained in one build
I love the look of Japanese
July 23, 2007 - 13:41 ET by nnptcgradI love the look of Japanese Maples. I want to plant one next year. Right now I have a bonanza of American Maples growing all over my yard from the seeds of the one across the street. Talk about carbon neutral gardening.
Now if only I could get flowers other than thistles and dandelions the same way..... Sigh.
Mother nature is a bitch - Ninth Corollary of Murphy's Law
These trees are doing the
July 24, 2007 - 02:58 ET by ex buff e-dubThese trees are doing the work the American trees won't do!
I'm not sure this whole
July 23, 2007 - 13:36 ET by ViperI'm not sure this whole carbon credit thing is going to work out very well. You do have to consider the CO2 produced to plant and maintain them until you purchased them, plus the amount produced by the tree moving machine to dig them up, transport them to you and then plant them in your yard. Without scientific concensus regarding this, we may need to ban tree farms and nurserys because they produce more CO2 to plant, maintain, and produce the product than is offset by their products. I wonder if there is a study regarding this?
Purchasing of offsets
July 23, 2007 - 13:43 ET by mytwocentsUh - I'm pretty sure that the debate on this is over.
Thanks. I'm glad we got
July 23, 2007 - 13:47 ET by ViperThanks. I'm glad we got that settled.
Do the Libs still mow their
July 23, 2007 - 13:52 ET by ViperDo the Libs still mow their yards, trim their bushes, run a weed whacker, and anything else that has to do with keeping up a landscaped and manicured yard? Just wondering if they are going to abandon those evil practices too?
Carbon Credits
July 23, 2007 - 14:10 ET by mytwocentsYes, I'm pretty sure they do, but since that is work that American workers won't do - it offsets the offset - I think.
Not only do they do that.
July 23, 2007 - 15:23 ET by danboNot only do they do that. They drive SUVs also. They just think you're a lowlife for driving one.
They get a plenary indulgence for just being a warmer. So all their sins are forgiven.
Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of truth and knowledge will be shipwrecked by the laughter of the Gods. Albert Einstein
RE: Do the Libs still mow their lawns
July 23, 2007 - 16:38 ET by Felicia LuceThey hire someone else to do it, and subtract the carbon points from them.
Um, Can I get carbon
July 23, 2007 - 16:40 ET by BlondeUm,
Can I get carbon credits for my extensive orchid collection?
They are nice and green and look very cool when they bloom. That ought to be worth extra (carbon) credits or something.
How cold does it have to
July 24, 2007 - 00:29 ET by danboHow cold does it have to get for your garden to get cold damage. 50? 40? I'm jealous.
Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of truth and knowledge will be shipwrecked by the laughter of the Gods. Albert Einstein
Hot air.
July 23, 2007 - 13:58 ET by Blogger Guy00001Carbon credits are just the left's way of preparing us for the inevitable carbon tax.
Agreed Carbon credits are
July 23, 2007 - 15:14 ET by danboAgreed Carbon credits are the left's way of not preparing for but rationalizing taxes that won't go to the environment anyway.
But it's also the left's intellectually playing with themselves. They can feel good pretending they're doing something.
Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of truth and knowledge will be shipwrecked by the laughter of the Gods. Albert Einstein
The whole concept of
July 23, 2007 - 14:17 ET by entThe whole concept of planting trees to offset carbon emissions is crackpot from the get-go.
For starters, how do they estimate the amount of C02 that a tree will consume? They base their estimates, no doubt, on mature trees. But are they planting mature trees? Of course not.
So what are they planting -- saplings (young trees)? If so, they are actually transplanting the trees from some nursery to their new location, for a net gain of ZERO. Less than zero, actually, because they will generate CO2 in the process of digging up, trucking, and planting the trees at their new locations.
Ok, then they must be planting seeds. How much CO2 does a seed absorb? ZERO. Depending on the type of tree it may take 25 to 75 years to reach maturity. So, at best, it will take decades for the little carbon sponges to reach maximum effectiveness. But we only have ten years to turn things around! (As they've been saying for over ten years.)
Ok, so suppose none of the seedlings get eaten by animals, and none of the trees die of disease or drought, and none get clear-cut by man for some development or for agriculture, and the seeds actually grow for 50 years and reach their full CO2 absoption ability, then what?
Then the trees die. They fall to the ground, rot, and release all of the CO2 that they have absorbed for 50 years (minus all of the CO2 that they have already released by dropping their leaves every fall.)
Does this make any sense??
Does anyone believe for a minute that these carbon credit companies are anything more than greedy hucksters?
Does anyone believe that they are actually planting any trees?
Do environmentalists ever give these crazy ideas more than a minute's thought before attempting to foist them on everyone else?
Curious
July 23, 2007 - 14:21 ET by Challenger GrimOk, I admit I was better at animal biology than plant biology but do saplings etc absorb more CO2 when they are growing than when they are mature? (sort of like how babies sleep more because of all the energy their bodies are spending growing)
I'm just curious, no political et al point to be made here.
Be sure to get your daily Fred Thompson Fact!
I Hate These Subject Lines
July 23, 2007 - 16:19 ET by entThe term "mature" is a little misleading. Trees are always growing, but sooner or later, they die from some type of "natural cause". The bigger the tree, the more photosynthesis is going on and the more CO2 is being used.
Thanx
July 23, 2007 - 16:21 ET by Challenger GrimYou think I'm joking, but my lowest score ever in Biology was when we studied plants. (I only got a 90% that quarter).
Be sure to get your daily Fred Thompson Fact!
Speaking of animal
July 24, 2007 - 20:46 ET by MikeBSpeaking of animal biology, global warming, and species extinction: it must have been a guy thing...
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
That's only because he had
July 23, 2007 - 15:03 ET by kgThat's only because he had not figured out how to buy carbon offsets from himself yet.
Wouldn't it follow that
July 23, 2007 - 16:31 ET by Chris NormanWouldn't it follow that carbon credits, if used to any extent, would just preserve the status quo - a status quo they say is causing global warming? It doesn't make any sense to trade off credits if they are intent on cutting carbon emmissions - not that anything they say makes any sense.
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
The easy solution
July 23, 2007 - 16:34 ET by Challenger GrimYeah, you can tell they don't REALLY believe this stuff, else they would advocate the only logical solution:
Nuke half the planet. Not only would you get rid of a large portion of all those wicked, "carbon breathing" animals & humans but you'd also put clouds and the air and we'd all get to enjoy a period of nuclear cooling...
Be sure to get your daily Fred Thompson Fact!
Since Global Warming is
July 23, 2007 - 16:53 ET by Chris NormanSince Global Warming is their religion and humans are their Satan, some of them might consider destruction of a big chunk of the human race a good thing...
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
Chris...
July 23, 2007 - 16:56 ET by Challenger GrimThe scary thing is... You're right. =S
Be sure to get your daily Fred Thompson Fact!
Haggis Gore - Gassbag Of Politics
July 23, 2007 - 17:53 ET by stratman"... seller's efforts to build additional wind capacity."
1) Al Gore and his sycophants create plenty of "additional wind capacity" being the blowhards they are. If there is an AWG issue, then they are surely at the forefront of abusers. If only there were a way to harness their (toxic) emmisions? (see number 2)
2) All the output from these AGW gassbags like Al Gore and Leo DiCaprio acts as fuel for plants, creating a self-sustaining loop for CO2 emmission utilization in photosynthesis. Maybe we should gather up all the "truthers" and put them in a Biodome, like the Pauly Shore - Stephen Baldwin movie, lock the door and throw the key away. That way they will be safe from the cataclysmic end of the world because of the "flat earthers" wanton ways, and, we'll be spared the bleatings and hypocracies of the AWG idiots while we continue to live life despite no actual AGW.
Just curious, was Biodome the inspiration for Al Gore's ripoff, um, visionary AWG philanthropy? Oh well. From one moron's lips to another's ears.
Biodome
July 23, 2007 - 17:56 ET by dagdaIf it makes you feel any better, the biodome is not long for this planet. I think it is closing or already closed. Just was not viable.
Our real problem, then, is not our strength today; it is rather the vital necessity of action today to ensure our strength tomorrow. Dwight Eisenhower
BioDon't?
July 23, 2007 - 19:22 ET by stratmanActually, I like the concept of a sef-sustaining biodome. It ties in with my interest of mankind's furthering exploration of space.
I did not know the project was still in existence. That does not bode well for terra-farming on other planets with less than earth-like environments.
AS a concession, could we launch Pauly Shore into space. I heard there's room on the Space Station since they tossed all the junk out over the weekend.
Credits! Credits for sale!
July 25, 2007 - 21:05 ET by Mike BrattonI'm certainly not the first person to have the idea, but I will soon be setting up credit-sale infrastructure for more than just carbon.
For example: I'm completely faithful to my wife. As a result, I will shortly be selling Adultery Credits as offsets for those men who need to, um, balance out that portion of their lives.
Do you drink? I don't. At all. So the next time you're tempted to make an inebriated scene at a party, or perhaps drink and drive, just have a sober friend of yours contact me. The Sobriety Credits you'll get will certainly impress the other party guests, a highway patrol officer, a judge, anyone you injure, or the family of anyone you kill as a result of your large "alcohol footprint."
Get the picture? It's a gold mine, I tell you! And as soon as I figure out how to transfer Handsome and Witty Credits to those poor souls in need, I'm on my way...
--Mike
www.thebrattonreport.com
Already done in Hollywood!
July 25, 2007 - 21:07 ET by PawpawNYou can't take credit for those type of offset credits, they're already issuing them in Hollywood!