On Election Day, CNN Headline News interviewed Standard Carbon’s Brendan Woodward to discuss the carbon footprint of the presidential election. In the full interview, political hypocrisy was discussed as both candidates have proposed cap and trade regulations, but not chosen to follow them on a voluntary basis.

The climate change impact of the two candidates was large-requiring the equivalent carbon offsets of more than 18 square miles of new forest to grow for 10 years.  For Barack Obama, this would have required about $700,000 to purchase enough carbon offsets, or a mere 1% of his 3/4 of a billion dollar campaign budget.

Air travel, commuting, office space, paper, direct mail, meetings and event, fundraisers, and get out the vote (GOTV) activities all contributed to each carbon footprint.

Can we actually reduce CO2 if the president is full of hot air?  Perhaps.  Watch the short segment that aired Tuesday morning:

We have contacted every Democrat congressional incumbent and asked them to make a commitment to carbon neutrality and offset the emissions from their election campaign.  This is not something unfamiliar to them.  Each member of , whether Democrat or Republican, has a carbon neutral DC Office through the Green the capitol initiative.  However, only individual action will make their campaign green.

The excuses from some congressional ‘leaders’ for not going green reflect on the pathetic approval rating that the current Congress has, which at a whopping 11% should not surprise.  “We don’t have enough time” was the excuse from John Conyers’ Democratic campaign which does not even have a Republican opponent.  Jackie Speier’s campaign in California responded that “this is a safe district, our race was settled at the primary.”   Frequent was the line that “it’s just too expensive.” This one we heard from Ed Perlmutter in Colorado and Ellen Tauscher in California who combined control nearly $2,000,000 in campaign funds, but could not afford $400-500 worth of carbon offsets.

Others, like congressman Jim McDermott’s campaign, are almost understandable, “we really don’t have a campaign, all that we do is go back and forth from the office to the bank and pick up checks.”  The reality is that most congressional “leaders” are just interested in keeping a low  profile and cashing checks when it gets close to election day.  Issues don’t matter.

We will keep trying…

In Texas there is an oil man. His name is T. Boone Pickens and he has pumped over 150 million barrels of oil.

Pickens is a wildcatter, but now his sights are set on something truly revolutionary: Wind Power.

Pickens says that the US is “the Saudi Arabia of wind power,” and that we could supply 20% of our electrical energy by the wind in ten short years. Also, we can develop clean burning natural gas as a domestic transportation fuel instead of sending away 700 billion dollars a year to pay for foreign oil.

By Picken’s calculations, we reached global peak oil in 2005. From here on, exploration and supply of conventional fossil fuels will lose pace with energy demand. The only way to keep up is to change-and fast! Check out the Pickens Plan for energy independence at their website, and watch the video below.

Danny Westneat wrote a very positive article about Standard Carbon’s carbon offset business and the changing face of politics.  Brendan Woodward talked with the Times about business, politics, and religion.

We know that these are not the best subjects for polite company, but Check it out!

Ron Sims is a crusader. Since October 2007, plans have been in the works to make greenhouse gas mitigation one of the required elements for a SEPA permit (State Environmental Policy Act). This means that many contractors, and even building supplies companies doing business in King County Washington will have to account for their CO2.

The County has prepared an excel spreadsheet that can be used to measure the Carbon Footprint of construction activities, as required by the regulation. It is not clear, however, what the appropriate and accepted steps for avoiding greenhouse gas emissions will be for compliance with the King County Global warming Initiative.

Carbon Offsetting should be accepted by the county for compliance with the new SEPA regulations. This would provide a streamlined, easily verified way for constructions projects to assist the environment, without sacrificing their quality or proven construction methods. Contact Standard Carbon if you would like to make your work site carbon neutral.

Conservative Heart-throb Newt Gingrich and Liberal Lovie, Nancy Pelosi have both served as third in line to the Presidency, and leaders of their respective Republican and Democrat Parties. What could motivate them to appear together, on the same couch talking about global warming except the shared belief that this is an important, non-partisan issue?

At Standard Carbon, we have been signing up members of Congress to be carbon neutral. Our Carbon Neutral Campaign program, and Carbon Footprint Worksheet have been specially designed to help campaigns quickly calculate their CO2 and then purchase the best verified carbon offsets produced from projects in the United States.

Only about 8% of the American public believes global warming should not be address as a political issue, and the vast majority of these folks are members of the Republican Party which Newt Gingrich once led. This makes it all the more impressive that Newt would have such political guts to stand up for what he thinks. Check out the video:

With the absence of Federal rule making, Governors of the United States have led the charge on reducing CO2 and designing new greenhouse gas markets. In many ways, the debate over “should we do about climate change,” is already over. Something is being done and the voters are demanding it.

• In a NYT/CBS poll (2007), 30% of Republicans and 70% of democrats polled believed that global warming is a serious problem. CBS/NYT Environment Poll

• In the same poll, 78% of all respondents said that they “think it is necessary to take steps to counter the effects of global warming right away.” Only 8% said that the government should do nothing (poll attached).

• The leading bill in the US Senate regarding climate change, the Lieberman-Warner Bill, assumes global warming is a threat. This bill has a cap 2.5 times more severe than the current phase of the Kyoto market, and extends past 2050. (Kyoto ends in 2012)

• California has already begun trading in advance of the AB 32 (California Climate Action Registry) cap and trade market. This cap-and-trade market becomes compulsory for California CO2 emitters in 2012.

• In August this year, six western states and two Canadian provinces (AZ, CA, NM, OR, WA, UT, BC & MTB) will announce the details of their plan to create a western regional carbon market requiring a 15% reduction in CO2 by 2020.

• The seven states in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (CT, DE, ME, NH, NJ, NY, & VT) will begin to auction carbon emission permits at the end of this year with official auctions starting January 2009. These states have been trading carbon offsets since 2007.

• More than 20 US states have adopted renewable portfolio standards requiring renewable energy sources to replace fossil fuels. Federal renewable standards have been proposed.

• The global market for Carbon dioxide (carbon offsets) was over $62 Billion dollars in 2007. It will far exceed $100 Billion this year.

• In a poll of 3,703 participants in the global carbon market by PointCarbon, 80% believe that there will be a post-2012 international agreement to replace Kyoto, regardless of the United States’ participation.

• In the same poll, 60% believe that the US Federal government will participate in this agreement. Existing carbon markets in the US will almost certainly allow some participation, as the price for carbon credits could be cheaper in a global market.

Of course not!  When the price for carbon Offsets rises, like it has been doing for the past months, it brings more projects to the market. We expect to be able to invest in more diverse projects now that the price is higher because new environmental projects will become more financially feasible.

Soon there will be a biofuel station on every corner and clean renewable energy will compete with the big oil that has so long had a hold on our gas caps.

The US EPA has been developing standards and reporting for renewable fuel producers in compliance with federal laws that require a minimum amount of renewable energy.

The Biodiesel Board has put together a large, interactive map of refueling stations all over the country. Take a look and you will be surprised how it can actually be possible to opperate a vehichle exclusivly on biofuels.

B100 biodiesel is responsible for 78% less CO2 emissions than typical fossil fuel diesel. This translates into an carbon offset requirement of about 5lbs for each gallon of biodiesel, or right around $.01 for every four miles.

This means that if you want to eliminate your carbon footprint by reducing your emissions and then offsetting, biodiesel is a great place to start.

On Hundred years ago, ships were still build with sails in case their engines failed on ocean crossing voyages. Today, high energy prices and conscientious use fossil fuels have brought that ancient technology back into commercial use.

A German company called SkySails has designed a giant kite to help drag large ship across the ocean. The sail pays for itself with fuel savings, and the shipping company can decrease a portion of their direct emissions.
When we talk about decreasing carbon footprints, usually a futuristic technology comes to mind. This video shows how simple changes can go a long way without the wait.