The fleecing of the greenies begins!

A short while ago I wrote a post about carbon balanced printing presses, and how carbon as a new currency was totally lacking in any standardized value. Of course, that won’t keep the folks with agendas furthered by promoting carbon emission hysteria from hyping it. So it progresses.

You can now put a widget on your site courtesy of the COSStats Project, which “calculates” how much electricity your readers are using when they look at your site. I put the word calculates in quotes, because there is no way to accurately calculate how much electricity is being used by a computer based on the info provided in web stats. There’s not even a way to reliably calculate how long a reader spent looking at the site, let alone where their electricity came from. But that doesn’t keep CO2Stats from giving you a number anyway. Should I be surprised that there isn’t a scrap of information anywhere on the site that explains how the number is calculated? Or that the number pops up on the page upon arrival? How can they know how much my visit really emitted if they don’t know how long I will stay? It actually updates with each additional page load. Don’t hit the refresh button – it causes emissions.

But even better is that along with this little widget with the random calculated number comes the chance to buy carbon offset credits via Sustainable Travel International. They have a handy site to calculate how much carbon emissions you’re producing by your traveling, along with a link to buy credits to offset them. Out of curiosity I put in that I drove 500 miles per week at 20mpg, which yields 1300 gallons per year of gasoline. They say that causes emissions of 11.5084 tons of Co2.

Gas is 6.03 lbs per gallon, so 1300 gallons is 7,839 lbs, or 3 tons and some change. Maybe their talking about metric tons, but they don’t say. 6.03 lbs is 2.741 kg, which works out to 3,563 kg total, or 3.563 metric tons. So, how did I get from 3+ tons to over 11 tons? When gasoline burns, the result is mainly water and Co2. Combustion isn’t perfect, so there’s other stuff, and gas has impurities and the world isn’t perfect but still, 100% of the gasoline isn’t going to convert to Co2 anyway. Is conservation of mass an inconvenient truth conveniently forgotten?

Sure, there are distribution emissions, emissions for pumping the oil out of the ground, and so forth. But are those going to go away because I stop buying gasoline? Anyone heard of fixed costs? How about overhead?

Just as with CO2Stats there’s not a link on the site explaining how the 11+ tons was arrived at. Just the expectation that it must be correct, and to feel like a true citizen of the earth I should cough up $175.50 to offset the emissions they are telling me I’m creating.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not an enemy of the earth. I use fluorescent bulbs, I recycle, and I try to save energy. I don’t even begrudge those who want to spend the money on the offsets for the same reasons we donate to anything else. Just call it what it is: A very loose estimate. Tell us how it was calculated. I don’t want to be extorted by folks who refuse to explain the rules to the game they’re playing.

Powered by ScribeFire.

2 thoughts on “The fleecing of the greenies begins!

  1. Here’s a maybe explanation from someone who remembers high school chemistry 30 years ago – the majority of the mass of gasoline is “C”, and when you burn it you add 2 lots of “O” to it to produce CO2. “O” weighs more than “C” so 1 lot of gasoline produces 3 times as much CO2 becuase it combines with oxygen from the air. Not a chemistry professor but the answer will be something along these lines.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s