Vloggers — get famous and win some prizes for your work by submitting to the Convenient Truths user-gen video contest.

The contest– organized by TreeHugger and Seventh Generation, and endorsed by Al Gore — is looking for 1-2 min videos that “demonstrate practical, easy and inspired ways to reduce your carbon emissions.”

Just share your fave carbon cutting tip via video, and win anything from a trip for two to the Alaskan wilderness, Patagonia travel gear, E-V Sunny Bicycles, Voltaic solar backpacks, etc. etc. Do it by February 2007.

Plus, winning videos’ll be broadcast on various outlets, like weather.com’s One Degree. Top 10 videos will be packaged on a DVD and distributed by Ironweed Films.

The entire contest, btw, is carbon-neutral, with emissions offset by DriveNeutral :) Good luck!

I’d enter myself, but I’m still figuring out my digital camera — Why’re all my faraway pics coming out blurry?

0 Comments

So after writing about how I offset the pollution I create by driving with a lil help from Drive Neutral, I got a comment from Sean about Carbonfund, which appears to do something similar at a lower cost.

Both are nonprofits. Both seem to be run by nice people who wanna change the world — in a green way :)

And both buy carbon credits from Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX), a group of US companies that made a pact to lower CO2 emissions (read the post on Drive Neutral for more deets on CCX) — though Carbonfund also invests in other renewable energy projects.

CCX posts on its main page the current price per ton: about $4 right now. That, plus a brokerage fee of about 20 cents per ton, is what all the companies buying CCX credits pay.

But it costs $5.50 per metric ton offset via Carbonfund, vs. roughly $7.50 per metric ton at Drive Neutral.

So why the price diff?

This is the question I posed to both Eric of Carbonfund and Jason of Drive Neutral. Here’s what I found out.

Jason of Drive Neutral says that as Drive Neutral’s goal’s to be entirely revenue supported ASAP — as opposed to relying on grants or donations. “$5.50 per ton would barely cover the costs of offsets alone, much less staff (we have a very, very lean staff by the way), website, decal, press releases, conferences, and other marketing/outreach costs.”

But Eric says that Carbonfund’s already financially self-sustaining through its offset work. “We do not receive government grants or foundation assistance. Everything we do is tied to the offsets.”

Hmm… Okay. So both nonprofits also rely (or plan to rely) solely on revenues to sustain their work. What do they do that’s different?

It seems that the two nonprofits’ philosophies — on how to really get the most people involved in solving climate change — differ.

Carbonfund’s take: “To truly solve climate change we need a couple million people going zero carbon and that means offering high-quality offsets at the lowest possible price,” said Eric. “Price is very important to engaging millions of people.”

Jason disagrees somewhat. He says: “At this point there is no evidence that suggests to me that people are merely looking for a great deal on CO2 reductions. What I do see is that people are more and more willing to take action on climate change and that’s because people want to take action.”

Which is why Jason says Drive Neutral’s really focused on getting the word out about carbon offsets — an educational and marketing effort that takes moolah. “I think outreach efforts will help reach 2 million people faster than inexpensive CO2.”

Eric, however, said that Carbonfund too is focused on education: “Outreach is an important component of what we do and we do spend plenty on it. Word-of–mouth is best but we’ve also gotten nice write-ups in the Wall Street Journal, Time Magazine, New York Times, etc. which help keep costs down.”

A Google News search brings up 4 results for Drive Neutral, 8 results for Carbonfund. However, I’d heard about Drive Neutral long, long before I heard about Carbonfund.

So — My conclusion is that — I don’t know.

On the one hand, I like Carbonfund’s sales pitch of sorts: “We give people the most offsets for their dollar,” sez Eric. “In fact, the low cost of dealing with climate change is what tends to stun people most (“you mean it only costs $99/yr to offset my entire climate impact”) and it is the message that is needed to really spur people to action.”

On the other, I’m sorta concerned about promoting the idea that combating climate change is “cheap.” — I mean, offsets are cheap right now cuz, as Jason points out, “most people and businesses aren’t participating yet.” Meaning that in an ideal scenario with most people and businesses participating, prices for offsets would be higher — and those who really want to combat climate change will need to WANT prices to go higher. Sez Jason: “We invite our members to participate and help realize the true cost of greenhouse gas emissions.”

So — My decision for the moment is to stick with my Drive Neutral offset for my car. Among other things, Drive Neutral’s in San Francisco, and thus somewhat more “local” than the Maryland-based Carbonfund.

However, I’ll offset my flights with Carbonfund.

For more on these conundrums, and to check out comparisons of various other offsetting companies, read this post on grist.

And now that I’ve given myself a bit of a headache thinking ’bout this, I would encourage you, reader, to stress a little less than I did. After making sure that an offsetting company or nonprofit’s indeed a nice one, go ahead and offset without obsessing overly about finding the “best” offset…

Update, 1/22/07: What do you do when an offset announces itself via a v. thick envelope and 2 heavyweight notecards, all tied up in a ribbon that may or may not be recycleable?

Update, 8/10/07: Wow — Some of Carbonfund’s offsets may not offset anything at all. It looks like the bargain-priced offset company’s making good profits, but not keeping v. good tabs on ensuring its offsets are legitimate.

4 Comments

So I haven’t gotten rid of my car yet, but Mut (my car’s name) hasn’t added any bad stuff to the environment in the last year.

At least not technically — cuz I bought a CO2 Neutral Certification, courtesy of Drive Neutral. I offset my carbon emissions :)

How this works: Drive Neutral’s part of the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX), a group of US companies that made a pact to lower CO2 emissions. If any of those companies don’t meet their CO2 reduction goals, they have to buy “credits” from other companies that exceeded their goals.

And when you buy CO2 Neutral Certification from Drive Neutral, that money’s used to buy some of these CCX credits, driving up their prices and thus making companies work harder to lower emissions.

Yesterday, I got a chance to chat with Jason, CEO of Drive Neutral — and I found out that I must’ve been one of the first people to buy a certificate!

The nonprofit launched in October 2005 — the month when I bought my offset. It all got started when Jason and Kim — then students at Presidio School of Management — presented a case to the school’s board recommending that Presidio become a member of CCX. The board said yes, if the program was made bigger — So Drive Neutral was formed.

And when Jason graduated from Presidio in May 2006, he was hired to work full time. In the works: A website revamp to include — you guessed it — a blog, and to give consumers info for further reducing their carbon footprint, whether by converting to biodiesel, riding a bike, or taking public transportation.

The idea behind Drive Neutral, Jason sez, is to give people an opportunity to be part of the solution when a lot of the information we get tends to be just about the problems of global warming, along with scientific data. “That’s not what the average American wants to get into,” sez Jason.

Which is why, especially since An Inconvenient Truth came out, people’ve been emailing and calling Drive Neutral after finding the nonprofit on the internet, buying credits and asking what else they can do. In fact, while 40-50% of Drive Neutral customers are already hybrid-driving environmentalists, a big chunk of the remainder are people who’re very new to environmental issues. Drive Neutral wants to reach out to everyone, “soccer moms and corporate executives included,” sez Jason.

What makes Drive Neutral stand out among other companies and orgs also offering carbon offsets? For starters, Drive Neutral’s a nonprofit, which a lot of people like. And because Drive Neutral’s attached to an MBA program, it’s run not just an activist body but by a “coterie of MBA students and professors” who’re committed to making Drive Neutral self-sustaining and competitive.

For those who wanna do more research into various offseting options before plunking down the moolah for an offset, I recommend the Q&A with Jason that Treehugger published — and especially the ensuing convo in the comments about the merits and downsides of both CCX credits and RECs (Renewable Energy Credits).

Regardless — If for whatever reason you’re still a car owner like me, get offset :)

Update, 10/23/06. Here’s a post comparing Drive Neutral and Carbonfund, two carbon offset nonprofits –

4 Comments

Unbeknownst to me, I’ve been driving the best “regular” car for the environment. According to Grist‘s Umbra, used Civics are the way to go if you can’t afford a hybrid yet: “They’re small, they’re cheap, they come in nice colors, and they last forever.”

To the left is my two-door 1995 Honda Civic EX, Mut, complete with green bumper stickers that cover up, incompletely, the scars of a hit-and-run rear ender’s work. On the upside, I never lose Mut in The Grove’s parking lot.

Looks aside, Mut’s super reliable — with emissions so low that I qualify for the cheapest member levels at both TerraPass and Drive Neutral. These companies aren’t exactly household names yet, but they should be. With both California-based programs, you basically pay to clean up some of the excess CO₂ in the world, thus offsetting your car pollution.

If you buy a TerraPass, you’ll fund green energy projects to offset your car pollution. The money from green car owners get pooled, then invested into projects that combat CO_2.

Drive Neutral’s a lil different. It’s part of the Chicago Climate Exchange, a group of US companies that made a pact to lower CO2 emissions. If any of those companies don’t meet their CO₂ reduction goals, they have to buy “credits” from other companies that exceeded their goals. What DN does is collect car owners’ money to buy some of those credits, letting us feel better about ourselves while driving up the price for these “credits” — which’ll hopefully make companies work harder to lower emissions.

TP says I emit 4,813 lbs of CO₂ per year; DN says it’s 5,917 lbs. I was gonna go with TP just cuz the lower number’s more flattering for Mut, but their $29.95 Hybrid pass is way pricier than DN’s tier one certification at just $17.50.

Why the differences? Dunno. Which does more good? Dunno. I think at this point, one just has to choose what green they’re most into — directly investing into green energy via TP, or indirectly investing but potentially getting more companies involved via DN.

Of course, for a poor grad student, the $17.50 price tag looked really attractive. Kinda cool that that’s all it takes to offset Mut’s emmissions for a whole year! DN’s also run by grad students at Presidio School of Management which clinched the deal. Plus, Mut isn’t a hybrid, even if it qualifies for the TP Hybrid pass — I don’t wanna create an identity crisis.

Either way you go, you’ll get stickers or decals for your bumper so you can proudly proclaim to all tailgaters that your car’s not part of the global warming problem.

Also, the stickers can cover up scratches and stuff.

Thanks to Karin of Peace, Love, and Coffee for the heads-up on TerraPass :)

Update, 10/15/05: You can offset the CO2 from your flights too!

Update, 1/02/06: I’m thinking of getting rid of my car entirely…

0 Comments