I’ve just filled in a WWF carbon footprint questionnaire, go on techies, give it a go: https://footprint.wwf.org.uk/#/
It came out as 97% of target footprint size.
That seems a bit optimistic if you ask me!
Hmm, what does optimistic mean in this context?? I came out at 101% - could do better! Indeed, to take carbon seriously, I would prefer to out-perform government targets - I’d prefer to be ahead of the game, and I’d suspect the targets are on the weak side.
Noting that the question about air travel asked something about carbon offsets, and hearing that carbon offset is relatively cheap even compared to cheap air travel, I subsequently came across this which might be of interest:
Vox’s report on the best charities for climate change lists ones that claim to be able to prevent one ton of carbon emissions for $0.12 and $1, compared to the $10 you would get on normal offset sites. Their top choice is Coalition For Rainforest Nations (but see criticism here), and their second choice is Clean Air Task Force.
Not that I think offsets are a global solution, but they might be a way for an individual to do something.
1 Like