Of course, it’s better to emit less carbon, and support systems and policies that emit less carbon. That said, carbon emission is unavoidable, and I’d like to minimize that portion of my impact as much as possible.

I am definitely willing to pay to offset my carbon usage, but I’m under the impression that this is mostly a scam. Does anyone use these services? If so, can you tell me what reasoning or sources you used that satisfied you that the service your chose isn’t a scam?

  • Call me Lenny/Leni@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Does being a plant mom count? My house is like a greenhouse it has so many plants in it. I am the plant equivalent of cheaper by the dozen.

    • darth_helmet@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      It sequesters the carbon while it’s alive, but you’d need to bury the plant deep underground to remove it from the equation

      • JungleJim@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        It doesn’t have to be removed to that degree to be useful. Simply composting the biomass and then using the compost will create more biomass to create more compost, all the while sequestering carbon in a living system. Life is a good place to store carbon, and this type of life makes oxygen. A greater ratio of oxygen also offsets carbon in a different way, creating more overall atmosphere and lessening the percentage that is carbon dioxide.

            • kakes@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              Because we breathe in O2 and breathe out CO2. The Oxygen is attaching to Carbon and leaving our body with every breath.
              This is the opposite of plants, which breathe in CO2 and breathe out O2, storing that Carbon.

              That said, I’m sure we also release a lot of CO2 when we decompose. Worst of both worlds, really.

              • Call me Lenny/Leni@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                That’s what I mean. If mishandling a plant’s death is bad for us, then handling an animal’s death in the same way should be good for us, right?

                • JungleJim@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Unfortunately not. While animals inhale oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide, and plants inhale carbon dioxide and exhale oxygen, both plants and animals release essentially the components upon death and decay, and these components, mostly carbon dioxide, are already overly represented due to fossil fuels consumption.

                  • Call me Lenny/Leni@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Considering the Earth has been around for a billion or so years, I can’t understand how these two circumstances combined haven’t turned Earth into a one gas system by now. I’m not a global warming skeptic, but this part just seems off.