Carbon Emissions; Carbon Credits

Everyone knows by now that CO2 emissions are BAD, and that we must do something about it. Two questions: what exactly must be done and who should do it?

There are a number of answers out there. Industries must clean up their act; people should drive more fuel efficient cars and drive less, switch to fluorescent bulbs and turn out the lights when not needed; do without a beer fridge; use the microwave instead of the oven if possible - the list goes on and on.

Then we come to carbon credits. The idea here is that a polluting paper mill, say, can buy carbon credits from an eco-friendly industry or organization, such as a Danish wind farm. This would offset the mill's responsibility and make money for the wind farm so that they could finance more windmills, for instance. An individual can pay someone to plant a thousand CO2-absorbing trees and feel good about driving the gas-guzzler. Have I got this right?

To me, this all sounds like a giant fraud. How exactly do we measure the mill's carbon footprint?
Is there a national standard? Ok, we measure the diameter and flow of the effluent pipe, the capacity of the boiler, the efficiency of the smokestack scrubbers, if any, and any number of things which are all subject to fudging. Do they turn off the scrubbers on moonless nights, as has been known to happen?

As to individuals, certain factors can be assessed, such as size of house, type of cars or cars, mileage per year, number of miles flown per year, heating/air-conditioning and electrical costs, etc., etc. Good try, but do we get to a good carbon footprint figure? How many trees, and what type of tree, must be planted as an offset? How long will it take them to mature? In one instance, thousands of plantings all died within two years. Give me a break.

One commentator has compared all this to the Papal indulgences of the Middle Ages, one of the things which angered Martin Luther. He took the words out of my mouth. A person could have his sins wiped out by making a contribution to the church. Not many peasants could afford it. Big sinners with deep pockets could apply directly to the Pope and maybe finance a Crusade. Expensive, to be sure, but better than burning in hell forever.

And this reminds me of something else, if I may digress. In the home town of my youth, there was a certain lady of the night who took Holy Communion every Sunday, after confessing on Saturday night to scrub her soul clean. It was a source of amusement in the town. It is said that Catholics have more fun and are livelier than Protestants because they don't carry their sins with them.

Indulgences are still with us, it seems. God be praised!