Confused Washington Times disses McCain and Obama on carbon offsets

Posted on

"Confused Washington Times disses McCain and Obama on carbon offsets"

In a bizarre twist, the conservative Washington Times, which would normally be critical of fuzzy environmental strategies like carbon offsets, is actually attacking the candidates for not offsetting all their campaign emissions. Opening with an absurd headline, “Green Crusades lot of talk,” the Times writes:

Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama have called for strict mandatory limits to control greenhouse gases but they aren’t leading by example — each has failed to pay for offsets to cover all of his campaign’s carbon emissions.

How does not taking (dubious) voluntary actions carry any implications about one’s commitment to serious mandatory limits? Advocating mandatory limits is based on an understanding that two decades of the voluntary approach has not reversed emissions trends. And again and again we’ve seen how offsets provide at best a limited environmental benefit (click on “offsets” category on right hand column).

Surely the WT can find more things stories to write about … I’ve heard it said Senator McCain has called for carbon limits that are in fact mandatory, but he refuses to call them mandatory … nah, no story there….

« »

4 Responses to Confused Washington Times disses McCain and Obama on carbon offsets

  1. Beefeater says:

    I would hardly call the WP confused or bizarre in this case. They called these carbon credit scams the schemes that they are and pointed out that even those that proposed them don’t follow their own advice. In the past they have noted that Al Gore purchases his “indulgences” from Generation Investment Management, a company that he co-owns, the hight of hypocrisy.

  2. Beefeater says:

    Meant WT, and spellcheck ain’t working this AM.

  3. Ronald says:

    Beefeater,

    Ah, come on, you can’t really mean that if Al Gore owns a company for carbon offsets and then buys offsets for his own use from that company, that’s somehow hypocrisy? What if he bought his lemonade from his daughters lemonade stand, would that be bad too?

  4. John says:

    It will break your head trying to figure out the weird strategies of Rev. Moon’s paper.

    My advice- don’t bother. It’s hard to trust them even for simple factual statements- like how many billion barrells a day China imported in 2006.