Commentary

First, a definition for folks new to the topic:

A carbon offset is a way to pay someone else to reduce their carbon dioxide emissions on your behalf.  We all create carbon dioxide emissions when we burn fossil fuels (driving, flying, heating/cooling our homes and using electricity).  It is our high level of carbon dioxide emissions that creates global warming. 

Critics of carbon offsets question two things:

1) Should we really enable someone who is producing excessive amounts of carbon dioxide the ability to continue doing so without feeling guilty?  This is the corrupt-medieval-indulgences-letting-sinners-continue-to-sin argument.

2) Is the carbon offset really reducing carbon dioxide?  Isn't it possible that the carbon offset (for example, a new wind-generated electricity project) was going to happen anyway and that the payment received just improves the profitability of the wind project?

Regular EnergyRace readers know that the medieval indulgence criticism of carbon offsets doesn't seem quite right to me.  (See What’s Wrong with the Carbon Offset Concept.)

In his blog Venture Again, Justin Label makes a more precise observation about carbon offsets.  Justin cites the study of a daycare center that decided that in order to get parents to be on time to pickup their children, the center would fine parents who are late.  What happened was that parental lateness increased dramatically.  The theory, Justin writes, is that "…[before] fines, parents felt they were violating a social contract by being late and were reasonably responsible. Once fines were imposed, parents were likely to feel the entire social cost was captured in the 'price' of the fine. They now made more purely economic decisions, being late much more frequently."

Justin asks the interesting question of whether carbon offsets could do the same for carbon dioxide pollution and enable those of us who feel guilty to be comfortable polluting more.

First, I think the lesson that the daycare center should take from their experience charging fines is not that the fines were inherently counter-productive but that the fines were too low.  Parents were deciding that the fine was a good price for a service performed. 

Second, wouldn't the daycare center prefer to have a positive customer service attitude about parental lateness?  We understand that you may be late sometimes so we have a 'Late Pickup Service Protection' program which costs $xx, billable in 15 minute increments.  That's a much easier conversation than, excuse me sir, but your lateness is quite rude.