On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 00:57:20 GMT, raden wrote:

In message , Mark
writes

Andy Hall wrote in message

I have a neighbour with a very expensive 4x4. he justifies it saying it
is
environmentally friendly as it only does 2,000 miles a year. I told him
to
get a cardboard cut-out and put that next to his house.



Why does he need to justify it? If he can a) afford to run it, b) it
does the job he wants to do and c) he likes it, then that's it.

The rest is fluff.


Oh so none of this matters to you or the trendy town people with 4x4
vehicles.
http://www.itv.com/news/climate_355371.html

Except

"His journey will be carbon neutral as ITV News will buy carbon credits
to offset his and his team's carbon-dioxide emissions generated by his
air travel around the globe. These credits will be used to invest in
low-carbon technologies and plant trees."

is a load of ********


That's really my point. With that line they are trying to do one or
both of two things. a) pre-handle a possible objection to the
exercise that few would have spotted. b) provide a pseudo-story that
sounds vaguely good to the uninitiated.

Had they been honest, they could have talked around the mechanisms -
i.e. air travel causing CO2, trading in credits and technologies and
tree planting as totally separate subjects. That doesn't make a
story.

I won't bother to watch this because they have started from a
dishonest position which is very obvious and therefore puts anything
else they present in the questionnable category.


--

..andy