Learning About Emissions From Business?

(CBS)  The anglers at a Miami sailfish tournament are bragging about more than just reeling in the biggest fish.

"We are offsetting the fuel we burn this weekend. Our T-shirts, everything that is involved with this tournament. People traveling in, our banquets, everything is being offset," said tournament organizer Dan Kipnis.

Kipnis is talking carbon offsets. He calculated the greenhouse gases generated by the tournament to be $1,500, CBS News correspondent Hari Sreenivasan reports.

And then paid a fee - the same amount, to offset the amount of greenhouse gases elsewhere - making the tournament what's called carbon-neutral.

So the $1,500, or the pollution from the fishing tournament, is being offset by a dairy farm in Clymer, N.Y.

How? Well, 600 dairy cows produce a lot of milk every day - and something else.

Manure…is being turned into energy.

"Yes it is dollar signs to me - manure to everyone else," said Vinnie Howden of Ridgeline Farm.

The manure generates methane, a very powerful greenhouse gas - but also a potential source of power. Instead of going back up into the air, the methane is turned into electricity by a generator, the equipment is partially funded by the fishing tournament.

"Right now, the farm actually has a zero electric bill and we actually sell power back to the grid - the national grid." Howden said.

The company that brought the fishing tournament and the farm together is Driving Green, one of at least 70 groups helping industries and individuals become carbon-neutral.

---

Learn more about carbon offsets at Couric & Co. Blog

---

But critics say carbon offsets enable people to pollute … and just buy their way out.

Dan Linsky of Driving Green says that's not so.

"So this isn't guilt money?" Sreenivasan asked.

"Not at all, no," Linsky said. "We actually do reduce emissions. If it was guilt money, I would take your money and say, 'Okay, bless you.' But no, it's not guilty money."

While Driving Green's projects are verified by a third party, not all businesses calling themselves carbon offsetters are.

That means you have to do your homework - like the anglers did. They hope to hook others on the idea of going carbon neutral.

[remmag]

That digester is actually in my home town, and my cousin is one of the owners. The methane digester was put in probably 5 years ago or so, before he acquired the farm. That program helps fund things like his farm, but they were churning out electric long before this came about. The real tragedy of the whole thing is that National Grid, the power company, only pays them a minuscule amount for the electric they produce. They actually produce enough methane that they could put in another generator and power a good portion of Clymer. Since National Grid doesn''t have to pay them very much for the energy, do local electric bills go down? Nope. Without the incentives of lower costs, many Americans are skeptical of investing in things like this. Somebody needs to push power companies to stop clinging to coal and hydroelectric and start looking at these possibilities.

Dams by the way, are the largest producers of methane in the world, due the amount of rotting vegetation they contain.

[nubix]

As for methane in regard to carbon dioxide increases, you''ve got to keep in mind carbon dioxide is a trace gas in the atmosphere(0.0383%) and methane is found in amounts several orders of magnitude less than carbon dioxide --0.0001745%. So even if you tripled the amount in the atmosphere it would still be insignificant in comparison.

[nubix]

Finally an intelligent response. Indeed it is without question that making use of that potential fuel, rather than wasting it is a brilliant idea. My complaint was more along the lines that a big deal was being made as to how the difference in greenhouse gases created by the dairy, without really making any connection to the fact the only savings occurring is in the the avoidance of using the public utility''s non-green energy. It just seems like it would have been profitable to the dairy to make the change even without the extra funding. Considering the economy right now maybe there will be a greater movement toward these smarter practices.

[remmag]

Sorry for the computer screw up.

[remmag]

First of all, if you were too investigate the greenhouse effect, you would already know that one of the worst greenhouse gases isn''t CO2, but good ol'' methane. In the last 200 years, the level of atmospheric CO2 has risen by 31%, while methane has risen by over 150%. While burning it releases CO2, CO2 can easily be used by plants, algae, any producer really, while methane is practically useless to most organisms. So, its not always about the conservation of matter, and more about what form that matter is in. Secondly, the use of methane digesters would dramatically lower energy costs in the united states, lower oil dependence, lessen the use of coal and lower the carbon footprint in general. San Francisco has a methane digester that runs of food waste and organic matter, so instead of letting it all rot, we can make some energy and lower methane levels. This may seem boring, but it is the answer to many problems in the U.S. Paying to pollute however, is downright absurd.

[remmag]

First of all, if you were too investigate the greenhouse effect, you would already know that one of the worst greenhouse gases isn''t CO2, but good ol'' methane. In the last 200 years, the level of atmospheric CO2 has risen by 31%, while methane has risen by over 150%. While burning it releases CO2, CO2 can easily be used by plants, algae, any producer really, while methane is practically useless to most organisms. So, its not always about the conservation of matter, and more about what form that matter is in. Secondly, the use of methane digesters would dramatically lower energy costs in the united states, lower oil dependence, lessen the use of coal and lower the carbon footprint in general. San Francisco has a methane digester that runs of food waste and organic matter, so instead of letting it all rot, we can make some energy and lower methane levels. This may seem boring, but it is the answer to many problems in the U.S. Paying to pollute however, is downright absurd.

[remmag]

First of all, if you were too investigate the greenhouse effect, you would already know that one of the worst greenhouse gases isn''t CO2, but good ol'' methane. In the last 200 years, the level of atmospheric CO2 has risen by 31%, while methane has risen by over 150%. While burning it releases CO2, CO2 can easily be used by plants, algae, any producer really, while methane is practically useless to most organisms. So, its not always about the conservation of matter, and more about what form that matter is in. Secondly, the use of methane digesters would dramatically lower energy costs in the united states, lower oil dependence, lessen the use of coal and lower the carbon footprint in general. San Francisco has a methane digester that runs of food waste and organic matter, so instead of letting it all rot, we can make some energy and lower methane levels. This may seem boring, but it is the answer to many problems in the U.S. Paying to pollute however, is downright absurd.

[nubix]

I''m sure you''ll find it alot more interresting when your State & Local governments start using your tax dollars to implement these programs.

[acolton1]

Just checking replys

[acolton1]

What about the story about: Briefings to focus on possible North Korea-Syria nuclear link & U.S. intelligence officials will demonstrate that North Korea was helping Syria build the facility that Israeli warplanes bombed last year, the source said.

Fishing and Global Warming and Carbon Trading. What a waste of time.