2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

The worth of an uncut forest must also be based on the consumer side of the offset market. It seems that you have explored a lot of questions about how to honestly evaluate the carbon sequestration sinks. But can companies appear to offset their carbon foot print only to offloading their carbon producing activities to new corporate entities they create on control. Or can they offload them to contractors especially those in countries that do not pay much attention to carbon emissions. Also, just like the forestry issues, can there be "cheating" in the creative ways that entities measure their own carbon emissions.

posted 4 years, 9 months ago
view in context