Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Chaosium Suspends NFT Plans
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 8549561" data-attributes="member: 7023840"><p>We need to be a little more precise here. </p><p></p><p>Carbon offsets are great, in the sense that they are better than no carbon offsets. I don't think anyone should disagree with that.</p><p></p><p><em>However</em>, and this is a crucial point, people should always pay attention to greenwashing like this. So let's pay attention to what the actual issues really are:</p><p></p><p>A. It's easy to claim carbon offsets; however, not all of these claims are accurate. This may shock you, given how upstanding people are in the world of NFTs and crypto ... but some people are just flat-out lying about having carbon offsets. So first, verify that they are in fact real. Are they working with a reliable vendor? Do they provide documentation? </p><p></p><p>B. Next, even assuming they are purchasing and using valid carbon offsets from entities that are using best practices, most studies have shown (for a variety of reasons) that the carbon credits aren't actually offsetting the amount of pollution claimed. Sometimes it's because these things are hard to measure, and sometimes it's because of the weird incentives that distort the market (for example, if you have a place in China that deliberately increases emissions, and then you pay them to decrease emissions back to the baseline in order to get a carbon offset ... was any good accomplished?).</p><p></p><p>C. So when you look at the first two, you see that carbon-offsets, in general, are better than nothing, but hardly the perfect answer. Moving to the instant issue, the bigger problem is that when they claim that they are going "carbon neutral," they aren't measuring the actual energy costs and environmental costs- instead, they are usually only capturing some portion of the transaction costs. Then, even if they did manage to capture the entire use-costs, they still wouldn't be capturing the growing and terrible e-waste problem.</p><p></p><p>D. Which leads to the most important point. Eating meat might be bad for the environment, but still provide calories. Extracting oil may be terrible, but it's providing energy. I have yet to see a positive case for this- it's a technology that literally depends on extreme energy use for value. It has no other intrinsic qualities. And it solves no problems. </p><p></p><p>Importantly, we already see, in the decade since this started, and most importantly in the last few years, how insane the environmental costs scale up. I honestly can't think of anything else that has such a lopsided benefit / environmental impact ratio.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Snarf Zagyg, post: 8549561, member: 7023840"] We need to be a little more precise here. Carbon offsets are great, in the sense that they are better than no carbon offsets. I don't think anyone should disagree with that. [I]However[/I], and this is a crucial point, people should always pay attention to greenwashing like this. So let's pay attention to what the actual issues really are: A. It's easy to claim carbon offsets; however, not all of these claims are accurate. This may shock you, given how upstanding people are in the world of NFTs and crypto ... but some people are just flat-out lying about having carbon offsets. So first, verify that they are in fact real. Are they working with a reliable vendor? Do they provide documentation? B. Next, even assuming they are purchasing and using valid carbon offsets from entities that are using best practices, most studies have shown (for a variety of reasons) that the carbon credits aren't actually offsetting the amount of pollution claimed. Sometimes it's because these things are hard to measure, and sometimes it's because of the weird incentives that distort the market (for example, if you have a place in China that deliberately increases emissions, and then you pay them to decrease emissions back to the baseline in order to get a carbon offset ... was any good accomplished?). C. So when you look at the first two, you see that carbon-offsets, in general, are better than nothing, but hardly the perfect answer. Moving to the instant issue, the bigger problem is that when they claim that they are going "carbon neutral," they aren't measuring the actual energy costs and environmental costs- instead, they are usually only capturing some portion of the transaction costs. Then, even if they did manage to capture the entire use-costs, they still wouldn't be capturing the growing and terrible e-waste problem. D. Which leads to the most important point. Eating meat might be bad for the environment, but still provide calories. Extracting oil may be terrible, but it's providing energy. I have yet to see a positive case for this- it's a technology that literally depends on extreme energy use for value. It has no other intrinsic qualities. And it solves no problems. Importantly, we already see, in the decade since this started, and most importantly in the last few years, how insane the environmental costs scale up. I honestly can't think of anything else that has such a lopsided benefit / environmental impact ratio. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Chaosium Suspends NFT Plans
Top