View Thread

I too am very skeptical about carbon offsets.  I believe it perpetuates our "we can buy our way out of the problem" mentality.  I know there are a variety of offset measures, some slightly better than others.  But from what I've seen, they will all give us little too late...  Edith  Edith G.J. Callaghan Acadia University, School of Business Wolfville, Nova Scotia B4P 2R6 CANADA Phone: 902-585-1012 Fax: 902-585-1085   -----Original Message----- From: Organizations and the Natural Environment Discussion [mailto:ONE-L@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Kevin Laverty Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 12:43 PM To: ONE-L@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU Subject: Re: Super Bowl strives to be carbon-neutral  There apparently are serious questions that need to be answered  about offsets, including whether there is varying "quality" of  what one buys from different providers. I am working with a grad  student team on precisely this issue, and plan to have a report  by mid June. I can post a link to it here when it is finished.  But please send me a message if you want to know more before  that. - Kevin   On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Sandra Rothenberg wrote:    

I am curious as to what people think about these mechanisms to be     

 "carbon   

neutral".  (i.e. companies such as terra pass, etc).  I was thinking     

 of   

starting an initiative for my University, but I got some push back     

 saying   

that engaging in these programs would just encourage those who can     

 afford it   

to just continue using as much energy as they want.  Sandy  -----Original Message----- From: Organizations and the Natural Environment Discussion [mailto:ONE-L@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Dale Fitzgibbons Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 10:46 AM To: ONE-L@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU Subject: Super Bowl strives to be carbon-neutral  Super Bowl strives to be carbon-neutral  Associated Press       The NFL's first serious attempt at a green Super Bowl did not go well. "All we did was recycle, and it was a disaster," said Jack Groh,     

 director of   

the league's environmental program. The year was 1994, when many special events paid little attention to recycling. The venue was the Georgia Dome. Groh, in his first year consulting with the league, found some volunteers and went about the     

 task   

the hard way. "What we eventually decided on was taking all the bags of trash from     

 the   

stadium, bringing them down to the loading dock, breaking them open,     

 and   

then hand picking all the cans and the bottles out of this really     

 disgusting   

and miserable garbage," Groh said. "It was awful. It was inefficient.     

 It was   

costly. It was time consuming. It was messy and dirty, and it didn't     

 yield   

enough of a return to make it worthwhile." The following year, the NFL came up with mission statement: Make the     

 Super   

Bowl greener, but do it using the same type of sound business     

 practices that   

have helped make the game itself so popular. As a result, the biggest of the big games has become more     

 environmentally   

friendly with each passing year. The Indianapolis Colts' victory over     

 the   

Chicago Bears in Miami in January will be remembered by many as the     

 first   

rainy Super Bowl, but Groh has another adjective for it:     

 carbon-neutral.   

"Everybody and their uncle is starting to talk about being     

 carbon-neutral   

and carbon mitigation," Groh said. "Five years ago, before Al Gore was     

 doing   

his power-point presentation, we already were trying to address it." The NFL's list of eco-friendly measures from this year's Super Bowl is     

 long   

and impressive - and surprisingly cost-effective: - Leftover food. Up to 60,000 pounds of extra food was left over from     

 all   

the banquets, parties and luncheons. These weren't leftovers in the traditional sense - this was prepared food that was cooked in     

 kitchens, but   

never made it out to the serving tables. The NFL distributed the food     

 to   

soup kitchens, shelters, churches and other organizations. "If you don't recover it, it turns into 30 tons of garbage," Groh     

 said.   

"You'd have to pay to haul it to a landfill. You have to pay tipping     

 fees   

and dump it there. It's a pretty costly proposition to dispose of 30     

 tons of   

garbage." - Leftover stuff. Miami was decorated with 5 miles of fabric in the     

 form of   

steamers, banners and other decorations. The league could have filled     

 a   

tractor-trailer or two - and a lot of landfill space - with its     

 leftover   

office supplies, building materials and various things bearing the     

 Super   

Bowl logo. "Everything that could be salvaged, we would salvage it," Groh said. "Inventory it, and distribute it primarily to local non-profits." - Recycling. The NFL recycled dozens of tons of cardboard at the     

 stadium.   

(Drinks were served in plastic souvenir cups, so most people took them home.) Aluminum, plastic, glass and mounds of paper were recycled at     

 the   

media center, where some 3,500 reporters sifted through a week's worth     

 of   

news releases. Tons of wood was recycled from the NFL Experience theme     

 park.   

- Negating greenhouse gases: Two years ago, the NFL went to the Oak     

 Ridge   

National Laboratory in Tennessee to find out how much carbon dioxide     

 had   

been spewed into the atmosphere because of the Super Bowl in     

 Jacksonville.   

The answer wasn't as bad as the league thought. For example, the ships     

 used   

for temporary hotels didn't count - they would have been pumping     

 greenhouse   

gases on cruises elsewhere if not at the Super Bowl. Still, the lab said that the NFL's fleet of 2,000 vehicles and the electricity at the stadium helped contribute to a final tally of 1     

 million   

pounds of carbon dioxide. "They said in the big scheme of things, that's not a lot of greenhouse     

 gas,"   

Groh said. "But you guys made it, you guys are responsible for it." To make up for its mess, the NFL is planting 3,000 trees in the Miami     

 area,   

mostly in large groups to maximize the carbon-negating effect. The     

 most   

notable project is planned for next month, when 500 native species     

 trees are   

to be planted to help reclaim the Dinner Key Spoil Islands near Miami. Groh said the NFL spent only $2,500 on making this year's Super Bowl     

 green.   

The league relied on local resources, volunteers and donations from organizations such as the U.S. Forest Service. Groh said the league deliberately did not want to practice what he called "checkbook environmentalism," in which a rich group simply writes a check and     

 leaves   

town. http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/6706682?MSNHPHCP&GT1=9331 Super Bowl XLI Environmental Program: http://www.superbowl.com/features/environmental-program        

--  Bob Clemen Fuqua School of Business Duke University, Box 90120 Durham, NC 27708-0120  Phone: 919-660-8005 Fax: 919-684-2818 WWW: http://faculty.fuqua.duke.edu/~clemen/bio/ 

--  Sergio A. Molina Postdoctoral Research Associate/Instructor Environmental Management and Marketing University of Minnesota-Twin Cities Phone: (612) 624 3223 Fax (612) 625 6286 E-mail: sergiomolina@umn.edu URL: http://www.tc.umn.edu/~moli0099/

I agree that offsets seem a little "off," in the sense that they are not promoting less energy use. However, they seem like a very legitimate intermediate step that can provide needed funds to the (still) nascent renewable energy field. And in some areas, there's not too much you can do yet to reduce fossil energy use, for example air travel to conferences. For now, buying offsets seems like a reasonable way to go in such cases.  -- BC

----------------

Edith Callaghan wrote:

I too am very skeptical about carbon offsets.  I believe it perpetuates our "we can buy our way out of the problem" mentality.  I know there are a variety of offset measures, some slightly better than others.  But from what I've seen, they will all give us little too late...  Edith  Edith G.J. Callaghan Acadia University, School of Business Wolfville, Nova Scotia B4P 2R6 CANADA Phone: 902-585-1012 Fax: 902-585-1085   -----Original Message----- From: Organizations and the Natural Environment Discussion [mailto:ONE-L@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Kevin Laverty Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 12:43 PM To: ONE-L@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU Subject: Re: Super Bowl strives to be carbon-neutral  There apparently are serious questions that need to be answered  about offsets, including whether there is varying "quality" of  what one buys from different providers. I am working with a grad  student team on precisely this issue, and plan to have a report  by mid June. I can post a link to it here when it is finished.  But please send me a message if you want to know more before  that. - Kevin   On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Sandra Rothenberg wrote:    

I am curious as to what people think about these mechanisms to be     

 "carbon   

neutral".  (i.e. companies such as terra pass, etc).  I was thinking     

 of   

starting an initiative for my University, but I got some push back     

 saying   

that engaging in these programs would just encourage those who can     

 afford it   

to just continue using as much energy as they want.  Sandy  -----Original Message----- From: Organizations and the Natural Environment Discussion [mailto:ONE-L@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Dale Fitzgibbons Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 10:46 AM To: ONE-L@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU Subject: Super Bowl strives to be carbon-neutral  Super Bowl strives to be carbon-neutral  Associated Press       The NFL's first serious attempt at a green Super Bowl did not go well. "All we did was recycle, and it was a disaster," said Jack Groh,     

 director of   

the league's environmental program. The year was 1994, when many special events paid little attention to recycling. The venue was the Georgia Dome. Groh, in his first year consulting with the league, found some volunteers and went about the     

 task   

the hard way. "What we eventually decided on was taking all the bags of trash from     

 the   

stadium, bringing them down to the loading dock, breaking them open,     

 and   

then hand picking all the cans and the bottles out of this really     

 disgusting   

and miserable garbage," Groh said. "It was awful. It was inefficient.     

 It was   

costly. It was time consuming. It was messy and dirty, and it didn't     

 yield   

enough of a return to make it worthwhile." The following year, the NFL came up with mission statement: Make the     

 Super   

Bowl greener, but do it using the same type of sound business     

 practices that   

have helped make the game itself so popular. As a result, the biggest of the big games has become more     

 environmentally   

friendly with each passing year. The Indianapolis Colts' victory over     

 the   

Chicago Bears in Miami in January will be remembered by many as the     

 first   

rainy Super Bowl, but Groh has another adjective for it:     

 carbon-neutral.   

"Everybody and their uncle is starting to talk about being     

 carbon-neutral   

and carbon mitigation," Groh said. "Five years ago, before Al Gore was     

 doing   

his power-point presentation, we already were trying to address it." The NFL's list of eco-friendly measures from this year's Super Bowl is     

 long   

and impressive - and surprisingly cost-effective: - Leftover food. Up to 60,000 pounds of extra food was left over from     

 all   

the banquets, parties and luncheons. These weren't leftovers in the traditional sense - this was prepared food that was cooked in     

 kitchens, but   

never made it out to the serving tables. The NFL distributed the food     

 to   

soup kitchens, shelters, churches and other organizations. "If you don't recover it, it turns into 30 tons of garbage," Groh     

 said.   

"You'd have to pay to haul it to a landfill. You have to pay tipping     

 fees   

and dump it there. It's a pretty costly proposition to dispose of 30     

 tons of   

garbage." - Leftover stuff. Miami was decorated with 5 miles of fabric in the     

 form of   

steamers, banners and other decorations. The league could have filled     

 a   

tractor-trailer or two - and a lot of landfill space - with its     

 leftover   

office supplies, building materials and various things bearing the     

 Super   

Bowl logo. "Everything that could be salvaged, we would salvage it," Groh said. "Inventory it, and distribute it primarily to local non-profits." - Recycling. The NFL recycled dozens of tons of cardboard at the     

 stadium.   

(Drinks were served in plastic souvenir cups, so most people took them home.) Aluminum, plastic, glass and mounds of paper were recycled at     

 the   

media center, where some 3,500 reporters sifted through a week's worth     

 of   

news releases. Tons of wood was recycled from the NFL Experience theme     

 park.   

- Negating greenhouse gases: Two years ago, the NFL went to the Oak     

 Ridge   

National Laboratory in Tennessee to find out how much carbon dioxide     

 had   

been spewed into the atmosphere because of the Super Bowl in     

 Jacksonville.   

The answer wasn't as bad as the league thought. For example, the ships     

 used   

for temporary hotels didn't count - they would have been pumping     

 greenhouse   

gases on cruises elsewhere if not at the Super Bowl. Still, the lab said that the NFL's fleet of 2,000 vehicles and the electricity at the stadium helped contribute to a final tally of 1     

 million   

pounds of carbon dioxide. "They said in the big scheme of things, that's not a lot of greenhouse     

 gas,"   

Groh said. "But you guys made it, you guys are responsible for it." To make up for its mess, the NFL is planting 3,000 trees in the Miami     

 area,   

mostly in large groups to maximize the carbon-negating effect. The     

 most   

notable project is planned for next month, when 500 native species     

 trees are   

to be planted to help reclaim the Dinner Key Spoil Islands near Miami. Groh said the NFL spent only $2,500 on making this year's Super Bowl     

 green.   

The league relied on local resources, volunteers and donations from organizations such as the U.S. Forest Service. Groh said the league deliberately did not want to practice what he called "checkbook environmentalism," in which a rich group simply writes a check and     

 leaves   

town. http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/6706682?MSNHPHCP&GT1=9331 Super Bowl XLI Environmental Program: http://www.superbowl.com/features/environmental-program        

--  Bob Clemen Fuqua School of Business Duke University, Box 90120 Durham, NC 27708-0120  Phone: 919-660-8005 Fax: 919-684-2818 WWW: http://faculty.fuqua.duke.edu/~clemen/bio/   

Even if the event itself strives to be carbon neutral, what about the attendees?  What about the people watching it at home?  The amazing consumption of highly energy intensive "food" on that day isn't discouraged (or offset) in any way.  I doubt we'd see the Super Bowl powers that be arguing that everyone should eat locally grown, organic produce for Super Bowl Sunday, ride their bicycles to the event, and solar cook said foodstuffs in their solar oven when tailgating.

Joking aside, I'd like to see an estimation of the carbon emissions from the attendees and those watching from home.

Wendy

On Apr 23, 2007, at 10:50 AM, Anastasia O'Rourke wrote:

There is a new certification scheme being launched for the providers of

offsets to standardise measurement systems and quality:

http://www.green-e.org/getcert_ghg_standard.shtml

It is still open for comment, incidentally.

Anastasia 

Anastasia R. O'Rourke | Yale University | Ph.D. Candidate | Ph. +1 203 432

5216 (office) | + 1 203 215 1575 (cell) | anastasia.orourke@yale.edu |

-----Original Message-----

From: Organizations and the Natural Environment Discussion

[mailto:ONE-L@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Joseph Sarkis

Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 11:45 AM

To: ONE-L@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU

Subject: Re: Super Bowl strives to be carbon-neutral

Sandy,

My concern here also has to do with the management of carbon-neutrality.

They need to have systems in place that are able to measure what the

emissions are in different scenarios with organizations capable of

accurately measuring both savings and emissions.  I don't think

organizational practices are so advanced in this area that they can

effectively make accurate estimates.  For example, if you plant a tree how

much CO2 does it really consume and how much does it emit?  I have been told

that a full grown tree is not really carbon neutral when it is full grown.

Of course I am not up on all the different mechanisms available to

organizations, but I bet in each one there are probably some

'guesstimations' as to what the true benefits are.  With conservation, you

can usually get a benefit that is relatively more accurate which is, (I

think) your original point.

-Joe

==============================================

Joseph Sarkis

Professor of Operations and Environmental Management Graduate School of

Management Clark University 950 Main Street Worcester, MA  01610-1477

Phone: 508-793-7659

Fax: 508-793-8822

URL: www.clarku.edu/~jsarkis

jsarkis@clarku.edu

==============================================

-----Original Message-----

From: Organizations and the Natural Environment Discussion

[mailto:ONE-L@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Sandra Rothenberg

Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 11:12 AM

To: ONE-L@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU

Subject: Re: Super Bowl strives to be carbon-neutral

I am curious as to what people think about these mechanisms to be "carbon

neutral".  (i.e. companies such as terra pass, etc).  I was thinking of

starting an initiative for my University, but I got some push back saying

that engaging in these programs would just encourage those who can afford it

to just continue using as much energy as they want.

Sandy

-----Original Message-----

From: Organizations and the Natural Environment Discussion

[mailto:ONE-L@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU] On Behalf Of Dale Fitzgibbons

Sent: Friday, April 20, 2007 10:46 AM

To: ONE-L@AOMLISTS.PACE.EDU

Subject: Super Bowl strives to be carbon-neutral

Super Bowl strives to be carbon-neutral 

Associated Press  

The NFL's first serious attempt at a green Super Bowl did not go well.

"All we did was recycle, and it was a disaster," said Jack Groh, director of

the league's environmental program. 

The year was 1994, when many special events paid little attention to

recycling. The venue was the Georgia Dome. Groh, in his first year

consulting with the league, found some volunteers and went about the task

the hard way. 

"What we eventually decided on was taking all the bags of trash from the

stadium, bringing them down to the loading dock, breaking them open, and

then hand picking all the cans and the bottles out of this really disgusting

and miserable garbage," Groh said. "It was awful. It was inefficient. It was

costly. It was time consuming. It was messy and dirty, and it didn't yield

enough of a return to make it worthwhile." 

The following year, the NFL came up with mission statement: Make the Super

Bowl greener, but do it using the same type of sound business practices that

have helped make the game itself so popular. 

As a result, the biggest of the big games has become more environmentally

friendly with each passing year. The Indianapolis Colts' victory over the

Chicago Bears in Miami in January will be remembered by many as the first

rainy Super Bowl, but Groh has another adjective for it: carbon-neutral.

"Everybody and their uncle is starting to talk about being carbon-neutral

and carbon mitigation," Groh said. "Five years ago, before Al Gore was doing

his power-point presentation, we already were trying to address it." 

The NFL's list of eco-friendly measures from this year's Super Bowl is long

and impressive - and surprisingly cost-effective: 

- Leftover food. Up to 60,000 pounds of extra food was left over from all

the banquets, parties and luncheons. These weren't leftovers in the

traditional sense - this was prepared food that was cooked in kitchens, but

never made it out to the serving tables. The NFL distributed the food to

soup kitchens, shelters, churches and other organizations. 

"If you don't recover it, it turns into 30 tons of garbage," Groh said.

"You'd have to pay to haul it to a landfill. You have to pay tipping fees

and dump it there. It's a pretty costly proposition to dispose of 30 tons of

garbage." 

- Leftover stuff. Miami was decorated with 5 miles of fabric in the form of

steamers, banners and other decorations. The league could have filled a

tractor-trailer or two - and a lot of landfill space - with its leftover

office supplies, building materials and various things bearing the Super

Bowl logo. 

"Everything that could be salvaged, we would salvage it," Groh said.

"Inventory it, and distribute it primarily to local non-profits." 

- Recycling. The NFL recycled dozens of tons of cardboard at the stadium.

(Drinks were served in plastic souvenir cups, so most people took them

home.) Aluminum, plastic, glass and mounds of paper were recycled at the

media center, where some 3,500 reporters sifted through a week's worth of

news releases. Tons of wood was recycled from the NFL Experience theme park.

- Negating greenhouse gases: Two years ago, the NFL went to the Oak Ridge

National Laboratory in Tennessee to find out how much carbon dioxide had

been spewed into the atmosphere because of the Super Bowl in Jacksonville. 

The answer wasn't as bad as the league thought. For example, the ships used

for temporary hotels didn't count - they would have been pumping greenhouse

gases on cruises elsewhere if not at the Super Bowl. 

Still, the lab said that the NFL's fleet of 2,000 vehicles and the

electricity at the stadium helped contribute to a final tally of 1 million

pounds of carbon dioxide. 

"They said in the big scheme of things, that's not a lot of greenhouse gas,"

Groh said. "But you guys made it, you guys are responsible for it." 

To make up for its mess, the NFL is planting 3,000 trees in the Miami area,

mostly in large groups to maximize the carbon-negating effect. The most

notable project is planned for next month, when 500 native species trees are

to be planted to help reclaim the Dinner Key Spoil Islands near Miami. 

Groh said the NFL spent only $2,500 on making this year's Super Bowl green.

The league relied on local resources, volunteers and donations from

organizations such as the U.S. Forest Service. Groh said the league

deliberately did not want to practice what he called "checkbook

environmentalism," in which a rich group simply writes a check and leaves

town. 

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/6706682?MSNHPHCP&GT1=9331

Super Bowl XLI Environmental Program:

http://www.superbowl.com/features/environmental-program

No virus found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG Free Edition. 

Version: 7.5.463 / Virus Database: 269.5.9/773 - Release Date: 4/22/2007

8:18 PM

No virus found in this outgoing message.

Checked by AVG Free Edition. 

Version: 7.5.463 / Virus Database: 269.5.9/773 - Release Date: 4/22/2007

8:18 PM