Chevy Suburban with 28 mpg? Not so fast, says Terrablog (UPDATE)
Voluntary carbon offset programs are a popular idea. Instead of making the more serious commitment to change vehicles – downshifting from a SUV to a compact, a compact to a hybrid or a hybrid to public transportation or bicycle (where reasonable) – someone can just pay money and let others work to clean up their pollution. While one of the more popular programs, TerraPass, claims to be effective, their program really just moves carbon pollution around on paper.This intro is all just to say that it's a little odd for Tom at TerraPass' blog to be so critical of the way that the Chevy Suburban magically qualifies for a 28 mpg rating under the CAFE standards (it actually gets about 15 mpg). Turns out – and I'm glad TerraBlog dug this up – the Suburban is able to say it gets that many miles per gallon because it is a fuel-flex vehicle, and the possibility of ethanol in the tank ups the mpg on paper.
I think this post may be coming across as too critical of TerraPass and CAFE. Sorry about that. I know that TerraPass is doing a lot more for the environment than having a spiffy website, and I know CAFE standards have increased fuel economy and could potentially save a lot more fuel. Still, these type of paper programs will never replace actual sacrifice and change.
[Source: TerraBlog]
UPDATE: typo fixed in title
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Jankdc 10:40PM (5/10/2006)
I use carbonfund.org for offsets. Like terrapass, some money does fund renewable energy. Even if it all went to "pushing carbon around on paper", they still retire that paper, so that utilities can't buy it. Carbon offset programs are not "the" answer. They are one piece of a rational emmission policy.
Reply
Me 11:35AM (5/11/2006)
"the Suburban is able to say it gets that many miles per gallon because it is a fuel-flex vehicle, and the possibility of ethanol in the tank ups the mpg on paper"
How in the heck does that work?
"the ethanol fuel economy gets goosed by a factor of almost seven in order to reward automakers for producing flex-fuel vehicles. So the Suburban gets credited with an ethanol fuel economy of 84 mpg, rather than a more accurate ethanol rating of 12 mpg"
Oh now I see. That is laughable! It gets funnier when I think about how many people will believe that their Suburban is really going to get 28mpg. :(
Reply
Adam at TerraPass 12:31PM (5/11/2006)
Hi Sebastian -
I don't really follow your claim that it's odd for us to be criticizing CAFE rules that result in more gasoline being consumed. Reducing carbon emissions is our bread and butter -- our mission, our reason for getting out of bed in the morning, our raison d'etre, as they say in Canada -- and we just call them like we see them.
Also, your claim that carbon offsets are just a means of moving carbon pollution around "on paper" is fairly extraodinary. If true, someone should alert the 163 signatories to the Kyoto Protocol that they're engaged in the world's largest paper-shuffling exercise.
In actual fact, ensuring that carbon offsets result in real carbon reductions is at the heart of what the good people at organizations like the Chicago Climate Exchange do. If the reductions weren't real, we wouldn't be in this business.
As for offsets not being a substitute for conservation, we're all in agreement on this point. Hybrid owners are disproportionately represented in our customer base, so please give TerraPass members their due. These are people who are making a real commitment to lightening their impact. Everyone should reduce their carbon footprint as much as possible through conservation. And for the rest, there's offsets.
Reply
Todd Hershberger 1:27PM (5/11/2006)
One of many CAFE loop holes... There is another blog here that describes how the mpg averaging works for auto manufacturers. I believe the passanger vehicle CAFE fleet avg is set at 27.5 mpg. The more FFV sold the more trucks they can sell. The logic is that everyone that drives a FFV uses E85 all the time, right?? hmmmm, and all those heavy SUV's are classified as work trucks and not driven by soccer moms to pickup junior... Oh well, the federal government is sueing the state of California for its lower emission requirements. Figure that one out. Government knows best...
Reply
psych101 10:35AM (5/12/2006)
I don't understand the whole carbon offset thing. You pay additional money to lower your carbon footprint? How can this make economic sense for the average consumer? What are the macro-economic effects of doing this? It seems like spending one resource (money) to conserve another (air quality? cold climates? or what?) I read the terrapass website page ( http://www.terrapass.com/whatyouget.html )
and it seems to me that you get some smug out of it. That's good. But as a charitable contribution, can you at least get a tax deduction?
I'm being cheeky, I know, but I really want to understand how viable carbon offset programs are and it seems to me that it only appeals to a certain philanthropic group. That makes me nervous, because the combined impact is less than it could be.
Reply