Althouse: "Second, we need to ban taxpayer-funded air travel to conferences."

June 6, 2017

"Second, we need to ban taxpayer-funded air travel to conferences."

"State legislatures could ban reimbursement for travel outside their states; Congress could require that no federal grant money be spent on air travel to conferences and similar events. A lot of academic conferences would fail, but that’s a small price to pay for saving the planet. And besides, it will encourage the development of Internet-based conference alternatives. A whole new industry might result: Green jobs!"

From a list of 4 climate-change proposals that Glenn Reynolds says ought to come first, from the elite, to show they really believe what they want ordinary people to believe.

And don't let these people buy their way out of the carbon sins, in the manner preened about by Al Gore, here:

"And what carbon emissions come from my trips... are offset. I live a carbon-free lifestyle, to the maximum extent possible."

Gore's idea of what is possible is so ludicrously crabbed that I don't know why he has any hope of solving any problems at all. He's already hit the maximum by buying carbon offsets?!! Well, he's got the money. And by the way, doesn't Al Gore make money from people buying carbon offsets??

77 comments:

Matt Sablan said...: Carbon indulgences may become a big market.; 6/6/17, 9:29 AM
Freeman Hunt said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 6/6/17, 9:32 AM
fivewheels said...: If it were the end of the world and the planet were really at stake, they would stop flying, turn off the airco AND pay for the indulgences, right? Don't you have to do all you can? It's a crisis!; 6/6/17, 9:33 AM
Freeman Hunt said...: It is very funny that indulgences have been seriously proposed for carbon. I thought all of us had collectively decided that indulgences were bad.; 6/6/17, 9:33 AM
jimbino said...: small price to pay for saving the planet.

There's no such thing as a small price to pay for saving the planet when you consider that it's We the Living who pay the price, including the childfree, while it's the breeder's progeny who stand to both gain from a "saved" planet and to pollute it terminally and finish off the surviving animal and plant species.

Has anyone even attempted to explain the justice in taxing the low-polluting childfree in favor of the offspring of the breeders?; 6/6/17, 9:33 AM
Ignorance is Bliss said...: Gore and Blood

What a wonderful combination of names...; 6/6/17, 9:34 AM
Ignorance is Bliss said...: jimbino said...

Has anyone even attempted to explain the justice in taxing the low-polluting childfree in favor of the offspring of the breeders?

It's for the children.; 6/6/17, 9:36 AM
tcrosse said...: The imminent rise of the seas has not impacted the market for oceanfront property.; 6/6/17, 9:37 AM
David Begley said...: The carbon offset exchange (monopoly!) was how Gore and Goldman Sachs was going to make a mint. Imagine a monopoly position in a market the government required people to purchase commodity contracts. Also ripe for manipulation by the Street. When cap and trade was killed by the Senate much of the opportunity was destroyed but Gore won't quit.

CAGW is all about the money. Why people can't figure this out is a mystery to me.; 6/6/17, 9:38 AM
Unknown said...: i don't know if the author was speaking tongue in cheek but all of his suggestions are very good.; 6/6/17, 9:41 AM
John Borell said...: Carbon offset lifestyle...try this analogy...

Slavery is wrong, immoral, and a threat to America and the world. Sure, I own ten slaves, but I provide financial assistance to ten poor families in a developing country, so I offset the impact of my owning slaves and live as slave free a lifestyle as possible.

Or, as I call it, BULLSHIT with your carbon offsets.

It is either an existential threat to humanity or it isn't. And if you fly in a plane, you don't believe it is.

Again, I call BULLSHIT on Al Gore.; 6/6/17, 9:42 AM
Owen said...: If I promise to breathe less frequently can I sell that to Al Gore?

Happy to do so. My ask is $100,000 for going from 15 breaths a minute to 12. Please remit payment ASAP.; 6/6/17, 9:43 AM
urbane legend said...: jimbino said...
Has anyone even attempted to explain the justice in taxing the low-polluting childfree in favor of the offspring of the breeders?

The justice is in the taking from these people because we shift the costs of current government payments onto upcoming generations. No new generations, well, you do the math. It isn't even current high school level hard.

As for saving the planet, as Seeing Red and tcrosse said in the public education discussion:
I believe 2 proper responses are:

OK, Paul Erlich

OK Rachel Carson

OK Thomas Malthus; 6/6/17, 9:45 AM
Bob Boyd said...: "if you fly in a plane, you don't believe it is."

And if you fly out of a plane, global warming is the least of your worries.; 6/6/17, 9:46 AM
Unknown said...: Blogger John Borell said...
Carbon offset lifestyle...try this analogy...

Slavery is wrong, immoral, and a threat to America and the world. Sure, I own ten slaves, but I provide financial assistance to ten poor families in a developing country, so I offset the impact of my owning slaves and live as slave free a lifestyle as possible.

Or, as I call it, BULLSHIT with your carbon offsets.

It is either an existential threat to humanity or it isn't. And if you fly in a plane, you don't believe it is.

Again, I call BULLSHIT on Al Gore.

agreed, which is why i've always considered the founding fathers as imoral as today's politicians.; 6/6/17, 9:47 AM
cubanbob said...: It's doubtful that we have reached peak oil but with Al Gore there is no doubt we have reached peak bullshit.; 6/6/17, 9:54 AM
Mike Sylwester said...: For sure, the Federal Government should refuse to pay for any participation or even attendance at any conferences that take place in sanctuary cities.; 6/6/17, 9:58 AM
Dave from Minnesota said...: Wait, the government has discovered webinars? Welcome to 2005. Also, in certain areas, Amtrak provides a good substitution to flying. Not so sure about MegaBus.; 6/6/17, 9:58 AM
Seeing Red said...: What was the bigger picture? The Articles of Confederation weren't working.

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

As Orrin Judd sez, tax what you don't want.

So, tax private sector and corps or take away/curb tax deductions for use. Or a combo of both. But then what about Boeing?

I'm not thinking the little guy who weekends, I'm thinking H Ford, Travolta, and the private jets.; 6/6/17, 10:01 AM
Chris N said...: Al Gore is a thought-leader, world-influencer, former Vice Pesident, poet, media-mogul, educator, scient-activist and occasional receiver of massages.

This global mover and shaker could have saved the delicate blue marble you ingrates seek to desecrate out of ignorance, fear and ignobility.

His carbon credit layaway plan was scuttled by the same filthy masses he tried to Save.; 6/6/17, 10:02 AM
Fernandinande said...: John Borell said...
Sure, I own ten slaves,

If they're white womens you could get top-dollar for them in Saudi Arabia and then buy tons of the newest, shiniest carbon.; 6/6/17, 10:07 AM
Seeing Red said...: Raise license fees? Gotta find a way to hit out-of-pocket and not deduct on the personal or business side. And should charities/foundations even own planes?

With Terayzuh's and Soros et al the could run they charities.

Those are another thing that needs massive auditing and tax reform. They need to up distribution of funds and cut back on writing off expenses.; 6/6/17, 10:08 AM
Seeing Red said...: They could run the expenses thru their charities.; 6/6/17, 10:09 AM
Seeing Red said...: Ted Danson should be added to that list. I seem to recall and ad about oceans rising with an expiration date.; 6/6/17, 10:11 AM
Left Bank of the Charles said...: Doesn't Al Gore get a huge carbon offset just for making the movie? That's got to at least cover a lifetime of plane trips.; 6/6/17, 10:20 AM
Chris N said...: The ignorance in this thread is as appalling as the climate inaction.

There you sit.

Oil-smeared smiles of ignorance tar the wings of shorebirds.
There is no hockey stick here, only Sally
seagull chick rinsed with Hazlewood's breath
Cradled in a $20 Exxon bill

And yet my overhead projector gently weeps..

-Al Gore (notes towards a new Millenium); 6/6/17, 10:21 AM
Left Bank of the Charles said...: Also, those who still think Al Gore would have made a far worse President than George Bush should grant him some offsets for not being President.; 6/6/17, 10:22 AM
cubanbob said...: Left Bank of the Charles said...
Also, those who still think Al Gore would have made a far worse President than George Bush should grant him some offsets for not being President."

Gotta admit that is a great line. Still, considering Gore is a grifter the fact he isn't in jail is more than enough of an offset credit.; 6/6/17, 10:28 AM
rehajm said...: A job title with foreign travel paid for by Massachusetts taxpayers is the holy grail of MA government cronies. A step before 'King For a Day', followed by Defined Benefit Pension Nirvana.

There was a period of years whenever I travelled I would see signs of Massachusetts government workers everywhere I went. A State senator's official vehicle in Scottsdale, a group outing in Montana, a poolside meeting of a dozen or so workers of some highly lettered state bullshit authority in Miami. Catered cabana and all, for fucks sake.

Taking that away from them would really, really hurt.; 6/6/17, 10:31 AM
Unknown said...: @althouse Gotta agree with you on this. I like Gore a lot but carbon offsets, carbon taxes etc. are just a way for the rich corporation and individuals to get even richer.

The only way carbon in the atmosphere will be reduced will be with technology that is cheaper than whatever is being used today and includes replacement cost.

Today, it is solar and wind power, both of which are blowing all growth predictions.

Unfortunately for the USA, China is the global leader in solar panels and Europeans (Germany, Netherlands in particular) are the leaders in wind turbines.

With the US leaving the Paris Accord, the Chinese and Europeans will sell to the rest of the World.; 6/6/17, 10:32 AM
tcrosse said...: The ignorance in this thread is as appalling as the climate inaction.

You mean rich guys you like get a pass on treating the atmosphere like an open sewer ?; 6/6/17, 10:35 AM
TRISTRAM said...: It's doubtful that we have reached peak oil but with Al Gore there is no doubt we have reached peak bullshit.

1. We probably have reached (or shortly will reach) Peak Oil ... Demand
2. You underestimate Al Gore (I'm sure he is like 'Peak bullshit? Hold my beer!'); 6/6/17, 10:40 AM
TRISTRAM said...: The only way carbon in the atmosphere will be reduced will be with technology that is cheaper than whatever is being used today and includes replacement cost.

Today, it is solar and wind power, both of which are blowing all growth predictions.

Hmm, no. Nuclear and Natural Gas replacing Coal and Fuel Oil generators are cheaper and cleaner and more reliable than Solar. How do we know that? Because in the US we are converting to Natural Gas now without huge government subsidies. And in Germany and France, where they are taking Nuclear off-line, energy prices are jumping.; 6/6/17, 10:43 AM
Gahrie said...: Today, it is solar and wind power, both of which are blowing all growth predictions

You think government mandates and subsidies might have something to do with that?; 6/6/17, 10:44 AM
Richard Dillman said...: I've attended many academic conferences over the years. Many of the best were local or regional, with low transportation costs.
Glenn's ideas are thoughtful, but will never happen, but online conferencing does have potential.; 6/6/17, 10:47 AM
Bruce Hayden said...: @lefty chuck

I don't necessarily think that AlGore would have been far worse, just not as good. I just don't see him having had the ability to have brought the country together in the aftermath of 9/11/01. The things though that I really did not like about him though were that he felt entitled to the Presidency, and was willing to cheat to win it. While still pretty scientifically illiterate and innumerate, he is likely actually the smartest of the bunch - Probably smarter than Bill Clinton, GW Bush, and esp John Kerry, Obama, and Crooked Hillary. Not Romney, of course, and the jury is still out on Trump (whom I am betting on here). I do find it interesting that those two candidates (Gore and Bush) were so lopsidedly opposite in their mental abilities. Gore was horrible in science, and, presumably other numerate activities, but bright in the humanities, while Bush was much more analytical than verbally adept.; 6/6/17, 10:48 AM
TreeJoe said...: From the conferences I've attended, online conferencing will never happen because very little of the reason and benefit from attending is about the content sharing - it's all about the networking over coffee, drinks, etc.; 6/6/17, 10:48 AM
Seeing Red said...: Roger Kimball via Insty:

....Like many international agreements, the unspoken subtext of the Paris Climate Accord is “hamper America. Grab as much of its wealth as you can. Say it’s in the name of ‘fairness.’”...

That has been reality in many areas for a long time.; 6/6/17, 10:52 AM
Martin said...: Of course, when he talks about carbon offsets he is promoting one of his product lines.

AGW is all about money for grifters, nothing at all to do with the climate or the planet, except as the MacGuffin.

I LOL at Musk dropping off Trump's business advisory panel--the guy's whole business model is to take money from middle income taxpayers to give to upper income people so the upper income people can brag at parties about how Green they are.

Maybe the battery "giga-factory" will eventually reduce battery prices to the level where one could say some social good is being accomplished, but so far all Musk has done is take from the middle and give to the rich, via government coercion.; 6/6/17, 10:53 AM
Freeman Hunt said...: "All you regular people need to stop using energy. It's okay if rich people like me use it because then we pay each other to cancel it out."; 6/6/17, 10:55 AM
Drago said...: Jimbino: "Has anyone even attempted to explain the justice in taxing the low-polluting childfree in favor of the offspring of the breeders?"

Societies role in child bearing and child rearing has been discussed at length for thousands of years.

It's unfortunate that you have not noticed.; 6/6/17, 10:59 AM
Richard said...: jimbino said...

There's no such thing as a small price to pay for saving the planet when you consider that it's We the Living who pay the price, including the childfree, while it's the breeder's progeny who stand to both gain from a "saved" planet and to pollute it terminally and finish off the surviving animal and plant species.

One thing that can be said about you is that you are consistent. You have been beating this childless dead horse forever. You do realize that if everyone were to follow your lead by not having children, then mankind would no longer exist? I bet you think that is a feature and not a bug.; 6/6/17, 11:01 AM
Drago said...: Unknown: "Today, it is solar and wind power, both of which are blowing all growth predictions."

The limited "growth" of these inefficient and unreliable sources of power is entirely driven by anti-market requirements of governments/lefties.

If these sources had the advantages their advocates assert exist you wouldn't have to subsidize it at all.; 6/6/17, 11:01 AM
Curious George said...: Al Gore and the rest of these AGW scammers should be tried for crimes against humanity, then once found guilty, lined up against the wall and shot.; 6/6/17, 11:04 AM
Hagar said...: This was all way above my head, but I read an article about Tata Industries dismantling an old inefficient and polluting steel plant in the U.K. and replacing it with a state of the art plant while moving the old plant to India and re-erecting it there. Somehow Tata collected (or saved, or something) 44 billion dollars in this process by taking advantage of "carbon credits."
I got the impression from the article that the Tata management had their doubts about the ethics of this operation, but, hey!, 44 billion dollars is 44 billion dollars in anybody's world.; 6/6/17, 11:05 AM
Gahrie said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 6/6/17, 11:05 AM
Bruce Hayden said...: The only way carbon in the atmosphere will be reduced will be with technology that is cheaper than whatever is being used today and includes replacement cost.

Not really. One of the things that science fiction writer, futurist, and physicist, Jerry Pournelle (PhD) keeps asking is why aren't we working at technology that removes CO2 from the atmosphere. If it really is a problem, then reduction through other means should be at the top of the research list. It isn't. But, my theory is that that is because the real goal is hobbling the First World countries, in order to give the rest of the world a chance to catch up, and pass us.

Today, it is solar and wind power, both of which are blowing all growth predictions.

Only because it is massively subsidize, directly and indirectly. We are still probably decades away from those technologies being competitive economically with hydrocarbon or nuclear energy, on a level playing field.

Unfortunately for the USA, China is the global leader in solar panels and Europeans (Germany, Netherlands in particular) are the leaders in wind turbines.

Fine with me. Let them flush their money down the bottomless pit. Just don't make us waste our money on such (as was the case esp in the early Obama Administration).

With the US leaving the Paris Accord, the Chinese and Europeans will sell to the rest of the World.

Presumably, you are talking wind and solar, which is fine with me. On the flip side, the big German auto makers are now panicking, knowing that they will be at a competitive advantage to ours thanks to their much higher energy costs.; 6/6/17, 11:06 AM
Gahrie said...: so far all Musk has done is take from the middle and give to the rich, via government coercion.

Utter bullshit.

Government decided to start giving tax credits and subsidies to spur the development of certain ideas and technologies. We may disagree with the appropriateness or effectiveness of this strategy but it was not invented or promoted by Musk.

Now it just so happens that one of the goals chosen by government, long before Musk ever left South Africa, was to promote the development and use of electric vehicles.

In other words the government decided to create tax credits and subsidies for electric vehicles, because they wanted people to design electric vehicles. They succeeded....Musk is not the only person who decided to develop and market an electric vehicle because of the government programs, just the most successful.

Are home builders evil because people deduct their mortgage interest?; 6/6/17, 11:07 AM
Hagar said...: and Al Gore makes his money as a "facilitator."; 6/6/17, 11:07 AM
Bob Boyd said...: My neighbor's kid was peeing in the pool. I told him I pee in the pool too. Now the kid won't go in the pool.
I should be able to pee in the pool now if I want to, right?; 6/6/17, 11:07 AM
RNB said...: It is perfectly feasible for Al Gore to live a 'carbon-free' lifestyle, as he is composed primarily of silicones.; 6/6/17, 11:09 AM
Richard said...: Since according to Al Gore and his ilk, carbon is a pollutant, then it follows that we should remove 100% of carbon from the atmosphere. The less pollution the better, right?; 6/6/17, 11:10 AM
Ambrose said...: I made $5,700 just last month working from home selling carbon offsets on the internet and you can too. To learn how, visit the following website........; 6/6/17, 11:12 AM
walter said...: Well..he did invent the internet ya know..which allows ability to conference w/o travel.
But you miss out on the dinners, drinks, glad-handing and back-patting.
Always fun to see the Crazed Sex Poodle blowing hot air about..; 6/6/17, 11:17 AM
Goldenpause said...: "Carbon offsets" such as those relied on by Gore are pernicious. They allow smug rich liberals to avoid the consequences of what they want to impose on the rest of us. There should be a 1,000% tax on them to discourage their use.; 6/6/17, 11:18 AM
Michael Gazonymous said...: Huh. Indulgences can be bought in the Climate Cult. Who knew?; 6/6/17, 11:20 AM
MountainMan said...: Bruce Hayden's comments are right on the mark. Here is an article with a few engineering calculations on the futility of wind power. With a little research data could probably be found similar to this with respect to solar panels. Neither will ever contribute much to global energy supply. If it weren't for government subsidies neither of these would exist.

And there is no need for any type of chemical or mechanical device to remove CO2 from the atmosphere. Nature already provided that eons ago. Their common names are grasses, plants, and trees.; 6/6/17, 11:35 AM
n.n said...: Libya would be a nice place to locate pv and windmill complexes. It also has a rich supply of oil. Perhaps the catastrophic anthropogenic global warming industry could relocate to Libya, now that the nation is under new management since the elective regime change and forced refugee crisis.; 6/6/17, 11:39 AM
Todd said...: Gore's "carbon trade" scam means that he gets to live as he wishes while some large set of third-worlders have to continue to live in abject poverty. Cause Gore LOVES the planet or some such.; 6/6/17, 11:42 AM
Yancey Ward said...: I have long maintained that AGW has all the trappings of a religion. Indulgences are simply one of the more obvious ones.; 6/6/17, 11:47 AM
walter said...: He's buying carbon offsets..butt will he wear a a fart catcher for methane?; 6/6/17, 11:48 AM
Hagar said...: Oh, and I assume the 44 billion dollars extra in Tata's coffers would have come out of the x trillion dollars the U.S was supposed to have deposited somewhere for the Paris Accord.; 6/6/17, 12:00 PM
n.n said...: while some large set of third-worlders have to continue to live in abject poverty

Yes, but a select group is redistributed, and so the proponents earn progressive profits, including: gerrymandered districts, welfare margins, coverup of elective wars, claims to fertile grounds, "oil for food" programs, etc.; 6/6/17, 12:14 PM
Curious George said...: Gahrie said...
so far all Musk has done is take from the middle and give to the rich, via government coercion.

Utter bullshit.

Government decided to start giving tax credits and subsidies to spur the development of certain ideas and technologies. We may disagree with the appropriateness or effectiveness of this strategy but it was not invented or promoted by Musk.

Now it just so happens that one of the goals chosen by government, long before Musk ever left South Africa, was to promote the development and use of electric vehicles.

In other words the government decided to create tax credits and subsidies for electric vehicles, because they wanted people to design electric vehicles. They succeeded....Musk is not the only person who decided to develop and market an electric vehicle because of the government programs, just the most successful.

Are home builders evil because people deduct their mortgage interest?"

Obama's billion dollar e-car subsidy started in 2011. Tesla spent a half a billion dollars lobbying for tax incentives.

So please try again.; 6/6/17, 12:18 PM
exiledonmainstreet, green-eyed devil said...: I have to hand it to Gore, as boring as he seemed during the 2000 campaign, he is an excellent snake oil peddler.

I can easily picture him in the Old West, haranguing settlers about "Doc's Miracle Elixir."

" Just a spoonful a day and you'll feel like a million bucks! Good for those female problems too! And don't forget to pick up a bottle to Gramps and the young 'uns!"; 6/6/17, 1:22 PM
Big Mike said...: @Curious, you and Gabriel are both right, though one of you is more right than the other. I don't think Musk can be faulted for taking advantage of subsidies that were already in place when he started his company. But Curious, my friend, his cars cost north of $68K (top is something like $134K) and they'd be worse without "Zero Emission Vehicle" credits. Moreover they'd sell a lot fewer without federal subsidies per vehicle for people who buy electric cars. All those subsidies come out of our all our pockets but only benefit folks who can afford a car that costs more than $60K after federal subsidies. That's the 1%, friend.; 6/6/17, 1:25 PM
Lost My Cookies said...: Yes, he does. That's how I know "climate change" via carbon is bullshit.; 6/6/17, 1:39 PM
Todd said...: Big Mike said...
All those subsidies come out of our all our pockets but only benefit folks who can afford a car that costs more than $60K after federal subsidies. That's the 1%, friend.

6/6/17, 1:25 PM

Well that level of self-righteousness and smug an't cheep my boy! When you own a car like that you can be totally forgiven for all of the energy and materials that went into making it, for all of the fossil fuels that go into creating the electricity that powers it, for the huge cost of the batteries and their later disposal [and pollution] and replacement because you spent a LOT of money (some yours and some EVERYONE else's) BUT you get to virtual signal YOUR superiority! You can't put a price on that level of self satisfaction now can you? Ready to sign? You buying or leasing? Let me get my manager!; 6/6/17, 1:43 PM
khesanh0802 said...: Each of these suggestions makes sense. Leadership is supposed to be characterized by a "Follow me!" attitude. Beck's suggestions expose how much of the climate change crowd says "You go first!"; 6/6/17, 2:57 PM
walter said...: Exiled,
His is truly the "show that never ends"; 6/6/17, 2:58 PM
SeanF said...: Yancey Ward: I have long maintained that AGW has all the trappings of a religion. Indulgences are simply one of the more obvious ones.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again - AGW is religion for people who think they're too smart to believe in God.; 6/6/17, 3:57 PM
Birches said...: Being called a breeder just makes me want to have more kids...; 6/6/17, 5:22 PM
n.n said...: Birches:

Being called a breeder just makes me want to have more kids...

Grandkids, great grandkids. No missing links!

We want a duck dynasty, not a dodo dysfunction.; 6/6/17, 5:51 PM
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...: Since the knuckle-draggers are innumerate, they can't seem to realize that one individual's "virtue" will not stop AGW; only policies and other practices that are collectively lobbied for will do it - and that requires publicity and campaigning in different places.

Al Gore's flights add about as much carbon proportionately as a series of drops falling more slowly than Chinese water torture in a flooded out basement. His haters are just trying to make an issue of individual character out of something that they lack the intelligence and decency to address for what it properly is: a matter of science and public policy.; 6/6/17, 7:30 PM
George said...: "I live a carbon-free lifestyle to the maximum extent possible."

Not quite true Al, when you speak you breath out CO2 - perhaps you could shut up for a start.

As a carbon-based being there are probably other things you could do to be "carbon-free" however they may not be consistent with "lifestyle."; 6/7/17, 2:06 AM
JAORE said...: "Since the knuckle-draggers are innumerate, they can't seem to realize that one individual's "virtue" will not stop AGW; only policies and other practices that are collectively lobbied for will do it..."

[Catholic priest straddling the alter boy] The collective sins of the congregation far out weigh mine. So here is a list of things YOU must change!

The real beauty of Gore's indulgences is he is buying them from himself. Brilliant.; 6/7/17, 7:14 AM
Ron Winkleheimer said...: Why doesn't he buy the offsets and reduce his carbon footprint? If you aren't willing to refrain from practices that you want the rest of us to abandon, then I kinda get the idea that you are full of bovine excrement.

Ed Begley Jr. had a reality tv show a few years ago. Apparently he actually believes in what he is preaching. Did not want to replace an ancient fridge because would necessitate the production of a new one, which would add to CO2. Had to go on a trip, so he calculated what would produce the less CO2, flying or driving. It was driving (a hybrid) so that his how he went, and I believe he still bought an offset. His wife was making him redo the kitchen, so they were using as environmental friendly materials as possible (recycled glass for counter tops ircc) and the stuff being removed was to be recycled, not go in a land fill. Oh, and his house was reasonably sized.; 6/7/17, 11:07 AM