Hunting for a present for a pair of environmentally-sensitive newly-weds? Try this -- a "just married" voucher worth US$234 in carbon offsets.
Smaller than a toaster but more meaningful, this piece of paper will compensate for nine tonnes of perilous, climate-damaging carbon dioxide.
That is the amount of pollution that bride and groom are likely to generate by staging a wedding party with 150 guests and by taking a long-haul return flight for their honeymoon.
The voucher, launched by French firm Climat Mundi, is only one of a fast-growing array of products in the market for carbon offsets.
Put simply, carbon offsets are a form of self-imposed tax that more green-living people are contemplating, aware that their lifestyle inflicts an environmental cost that is simply not reflected in the price of fossil fuels.
Burning oil, gas and coal releases carbon dioxide, which causes solar heat to build in the atmosphere.
This greenhouse effect -- global warming -- is driving potentially catastrophic changes in the Earth's climate system. Water stress, floods, shrinking snow cover, retreating glaciers and permafrost, more powerful hurricanes and typhoons -- all these feature in the expected weather changes of the 21st century.
Carbon offsetting is a practice that dates back about a dozen years and includes among its advocates former US vice president Al Gore, maker of the Oscar-nominated global warming documentary An Inconvenient Truth.
It entails compensating for one's own unavoidable carbon dioxide pollution by investing in projects elsewhere that reduce or eliminate those emissions.
For instance, the French government, who staged last week's meeting of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), calculated that the meeting would generate 1,150 tonnes in carbon dioxide, or its equivalent in other greenhouse gases, mainly from air transport.
To help make this calculation, each of the 500 scientists attending the IPCC talks was asked to fill in a questionnaire, detailing his or her itinerary and the mode of travel.
To ensure that the meeting was "carbon neutral," France reduced 1,150 tonnes of carbon dioxide elsewhere. It is financing high-yield cooking stoves in rural Eritrea, in the Horn of Africa.
These stoves are heated by wood, the traditional fuel in Eritrea, but they are 50 percent more energy-efficient than previous models.
Corporations and individuals who want to ease carbon guilt -- or flourish green credentials -- can buy the offset through an intermediary.
Some intermediaries deal with investments in huge foreign projects, such as biogas initiatives in China aimed at weaning the world's most populous country from its dependence on coal.
Such schemes typically fall under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) or Joint Implementation initiative of the UN's Kyoto Protocol.
Other schemes, though, are smaller, local and targeted at the individual.
For example, the CarbonNeutral Company in Britain calculates that driving a car with a petrol engine of between 1.4 and 2.0 liters for around 10,000km a year generates around two tonnes of carbon dioxide.
With a purchase of just US$29.6, the firm says, you could help plant trees in native forests in Britain that would soak up these emissions -- in effect, making your driving a zero-emissions activity.
The broadening range of offsets innovations is triggering debate about the quality of some schemes.
Earlier this month, the British government launched a consultation about standards and a code of practice as a safeguard against ripoffs or disappointment that could badly damage a promising activity.
"People need to be sure that the way they offset is actually making a difference," said Environment Secretary David Milliband.
Alister Scott, spokesman for the University of Sussex Energy Group, an independent group researching energy projects, said offsets were "well-intentioned" but variable in their effect.
The best schemes were those that built capacity -- in other words, they generated further emissions reductions in their own right.
"Simply taking a straight carbon dioxide number and thinking that you are solving the problem is a bit naive," Scott said. "It is not enough, you have to look at the question critically."
Chinese strongman Xi Jinping (習近平) hasn’t had a very good spring, either economically or politically. Not that long ago, he seemed to be riding high. The PRC economy had been on a long winning streak of more than six percent annual growth, catapulting the world’s most populous nation into the second-largest power, behind only the United States. Hundreds of millions had been brought out of poverty. Beijing’s military too had emerged as the most powerful in Asia, lagging only behind the US, the long-time leader on the global stage. One can attribute much of the recent downturn to the international economic
On Sept. 27, 2002, the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste (East Timor) joined the UN to become its 191st member. Since then, two other nations have joined, Montenegro on June 28, 2006, and South Sudan on July 14, 2011. The combined total of the populations of these three nations is just more than half that of Taiwan’s 23.7 million people. East Timor has 1.3 million, Montenegro has slightly more than half a million and South Sudan has 10.9 million. They all are members of the UN, yet much more populous Taiwan is denied membership. Of the three, East Timor, as a Southeast Asian
Taiwan has for decades singlehandedly borne the brunt of a revanchist, ultra-nationalist China — until now. Ever since Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison had the temerity to call for a transparent, international investigation into the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic, Beijing has been turning the screws on Canberra. This has included unleashing aggressive “wolf warrior” diplomats to intimidate Australian policymakers, enacting punitive tariffs on its exports, and threatening an embargo on Chinese tourists and students to the nation. A tense situation became more serious on June 19 after Morrison revealed that a “sophisticated state-based actor” — read: China — had launched a
Hsiao Bi-khim (蕭美琴) is to be Taiwan’s next representative to the US. Hsiao is well versed in international affairs and Taiwan-US relations. In her days as a student in the US, she was a member of the Formosan Association for Public Affairs (FAPA) and served as chief executive of the Democratic Progressive Party’s US mission. She is familiar with a broad spectrum of Taiwanese affairs in the US. FAPA hopes that Hsiao, after taking up her new post, would continue to deepen and normalize relations between Taiwan and the US, and that she would try to get a free-trade agreement