Views and debates on climate change policy
Home | Panelists | Staff Blog | RSS

Planet Panelists

Archive: March 14, 2010 - March 20, 2010

Let's not 'off' offsets just yet

I don't know what position Gertrude Stein might have taken on global warming, but I am certain that she would have grasped the concept of offsets: after all, a ton of CO2 is a ton of CO2 is a ton...

By Pam Faggert | March 20, 2010; 8:42 AM ET | Comments (1)

Economy is too large for offsets

Emission offsets are elegant in theory but ugly in practice. They prove that what is appealing in a scholarly paper might have a lot less appeal and practicality when attempted in practice.

By William O'Keefe | March 19, 2010; 2:20 PM ET | Comments (4)

Offsets must ensure environmental integrity, reduce emissions

Offsets should continue to be part of the global and U.S. solutions to addressing climate change as long as they ensure environmental integrity and reflect real reductions in emissions.

By Ned Helme | March 19, 2010; 12:00 PM ET | Comments (2)

Offsets can build momentum for a global effort

Carbon offsets are interesting for three interrelated reasons.

By Lars G. Josefsson | March 19, 2010; 12:00 PM ET | Comments (1)

By the time we factor everything it'll be too late

As if the question about human intervention in any rise in the earth's temperature wasn't complicated enough, now we have the factor of increased methane releases from tundra areas where the permafrost is melting as the temperature rises.

By Rick Edmund | March 15, 2010; 3:33 PM ET | Comments (1)

 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company