The American Spectator

p> INDULGE ME br> Re: Iain Murray’s A Pardoner’s Tale : /p>

Iain Murray is an entertaining writer, but a terrible reader. Carbon offsets should be seen as merely a partial solution to aid us in ratcheting down our individual global warming pollution. They are a way for ordinary citizens to begin to influence the economy while waiting for elected representatives to understand the basic science of global warming. Does Iain Murray dispose of all his own garbage, or treat his own sewage? No. He pays third parties to do these things for him so that his neighbors are not impacted by his pollution, partly because he’s required to. But even in the absence of regulation, he might still choose to be a responsible citizen. He wouldn’t consider paying others to deal with his waste an indulgence, and the cost might actually induce him to reduce it rather than merely treat it.

p>If there were functioning markets in greenhouse gas pollution, we would all face the true costs of our polluting activities, and only a few super-elites would fail to opt for some level of conservation. Current offset prices appear to be a bargain because there are so many latent opportunities for low-cost conservation and renewable energy generation. Costs should rise as those cheap options are exhausted, but the economy will also be learning by doing, so rising costs are not a given. And anyone deciding to shop for an offset should look for a marketer which offers third-party certification according to national or international standards, as the Evangelical Climate Initiative did when choosing Carbonfund.org as a partner. And contrary to Mr Murray’s extravagant claims, the ECI does not receive a penny from any offsets payments. br> — Lowell (Rusty) Pritchard Jr. Ph.D. br> National Director for Outreach br> Evangelical Environmental Network br> Suwanee, Georgia /p>