Well, this is what I think most companies get out of 'carbon neutral' policies - its taken from the Wikipidia site on their very good balanced article on Carbon Offsetting:
"Not all environmentalists agree with carbon offsets. George Monbiot, an English environmentalist and progressive writer, has compared carbon offsets to the practice of purchasing Indulgences during the Middle Ages, whereby people with money could purchase forgiveness for their sins (instead of actually repenting and not sinning anymore). Monbiot also says that that the trade in carbon offsets is an excuse for business as usual with regards to pollution."
Rich companies/people spend money to solve problems rather than modifyin behaviour. This gives them the 'right' to preach to others and to carry on doing whatever they wanted to do......
Carbon offset - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So does this mean I'm against F1? No, it means I'm against people that say they are saving the world when in fact all they are doing is paying someone not to cut down some trees.
Some excellent reading on this by the way - for instance, trees give out more CO2 when they decay that they absorb during their life time - trees simply store CO2, they dont actually reduce it.
"this study found little to no net global cooling from tree planting in temperate climates" "There are also concerns that using carbon offsets actually increases demand for polluting sources of power since overall power consumption isn't being reduced"
The final word on it is the quote above surely though - Carbon Offsetting by buying trees elsewhere in the world is simple false economy - unless you actually cut back on something you canot possibly gain - for instance, when my wife tells me that she saved £50 at the sales I ask her to show me the £50 that she saved - and yet her purse is empty because she actually spent all the money I gave her in order to save £50.
