I was watching a programme on C4 earlier tonight on this and it looks like it has all the believability of the one armed fisherman (the fish was that long /holds up hand). Most seem to be purely money making exercises. If trees are going to be planted anyway then that isnt an addition, some actually damage the environment and many fail.

A BP plan to burn off methane from pig manure is an interesting item, but why not run a generator with it and supply gas to  local communities? The programme doesnt say anything about this.

Much better IMO to check if your electric supplier has an option for green energy and go for that. They are required to supply so much by law but if enough join then they would have to expand. Then minimise your use a bit.

If you really feel like you need to pay extra for those holiday flights then invest in the shares of alternate energy companies. You get a profit from doing that too.

Interesting to find others view on this, at least dodgy, subject. Should we be paying people in 3rd world countries to pollute less so we can pollute more?

i dont think people can decide that for themselves. carbon offsetting is a good way to repopulate our planet with as much vegetation as possible, to minimize the impact illegal logging has in 3rd world countries.


people will never give up their ability to jet off for 2 weeks to a different country, let alone invest in an alternative energy company and get any significant gain from their £500 holiday.