I like most of what Gates said here, and think he is a good figure to push for social/political change; however, I believe his "carbon offset" beliefs are not the right way to do things. I don't...
I like most of what Gates said here, and think he is a good figure to push for social/political change; however, I believe his "carbon offset" beliefs are not the right way to do things. I don't hold it against him, since of anyone, he should be the one to travel as a leader to get his ideas done, but I believe carbon offsets are a misguided way of doing things.
Although carbon offsets may create a net-zero carbon footprint in the end, the carbon footprint Gates and others create still significantly impact our ecosystems today, whereas carbon offsets attempt to mitigate that later down the line. I think it's more prudent to try to decrease our carbon footprints today rather than attempt to pay them back later on.
However, money absolutely needs to be put towards carbon emissions, but it cannot be used as an excuse for having a larger footprint. Billionaires such as Gates shouldn't have a "get out of Carbon Footprints free" card because of their wealth and what they're doing to help climate change, even if they are trying to help the environment in ways others might not be able to.
I have nothing against Gates whatsoever — I’m absolutely a fan of all the incredible work he does, and out of everyone, him paying carbon offsets is absolutely okay. After all, all the good he’s...
I have nothing against Gates whatsoever — I’m absolutely a fan of all the incredible work he does, and out of everyone, him paying carbon offsets is absolutely okay. After all, all the good he’s doing for the world is more than worth what carbon emissions he creates doing the good he, Melinda, and their foundation do. Their exploration into climate work is amazing, and all they’re doing to fund research should absolutely be commended.
However, I’m just not sure whether the concept of carbon offset is the best idea to reduce one’s carbon footprint. I think it’s a good thought, but it could easily be treated as a write-off by the rich as a way to act as if they’re supporting climate goals when there’s more direct things they might be able to do (such as the CEO of a corporation, for example). It’s a good place to start, but there’s more direct ways of helping the environment for the rich, such as those Gates is targeting — I think he’s using them in the right way but that others might see them as all they have to do to prevent climate change when it is a much larger problem than that.
Let me know if this makes sense — I’m still trying to figure this out exactly. The concept of the carbon offsets is somewhat new to me, and I think it could be used in the wrong sort of way.
Mirrors for the outsiders
edit: added the Overtime piece
I like most of what Gates said here, and think he is a good figure to push for social/political change; however, I believe his "carbon offset" beliefs are not the right way to do things. I don't hold it against him, since of anyone, he should be the one to travel as a leader to get his ideas done, but I believe carbon offsets are a misguided way of doing things.
Although carbon offsets may create a net-zero carbon footprint in the end, the carbon footprint Gates and others create still significantly impact our ecosystems today, whereas carbon offsets attempt to mitigate that later down the line. I think it's more prudent to try to decrease our carbon footprints today rather than attempt to pay them back later on.
However, money absolutely needs to be put towards carbon emissions, but it cannot be used as an excuse for having a larger footprint. Billionaires such as Gates shouldn't have a "get out of Carbon Footprints free" card because of their wealth and what they're doing to help climate change, even if they are trying to help the environment in ways others might not be able to.
I have nothing against Gates whatsoever — I’m absolutely a fan of all the incredible work he does, and out of everyone, him paying carbon offsets is absolutely okay. After all, all the good he’s doing for the world is more than worth what carbon emissions he creates doing the good he, Melinda, and their foundation do. Their exploration into climate work is amazing, and all they’re doing to fund research should absolutely be commended.
However, I’m just not sure whether the concept of carbon offset is the best idea to reduce one’s carbon footprint. I think it’s a good thought, but it could easily be treated as a write-off by the rich as a way to act as if they’re supporting climate goals when there’s more direct things they might be able to do (such as the CEO of a corporation, for example). It’s a good place to start, but there’s more direct ways of helping the environment for the rich, such as those Gates is targeting — I think he’s using them in the right way but that others might see them as all they have to do to prevent climate change when it is a much larger problem than that.
Let me know if this makes sense — I’m still trying to figure this out exactly. The concept of the carbon offsets is somewhat new to me, and I think it could be used in the wrong sort of way.