The 炭素 警官，（賞などを）獲得する-out

Tony Blair has 発表するd he will do the decent thing and negate the 惑星-warming 影響s of his jet-力／強力にするd jaunt across the 大西洋. But can 工場／植物ing a tree REALLY 修理 the 環境の 損失? MICHAEL HANLON 調査するs the 炭素 警官，（賞などを）獲得する-out:

So that's all 権利 then. After jetting off to Miami for his winter holiday (and why not?) and 直面するing a self-righteous 一斉射撃，（質問などの）連発／ダム of 批評 from 環境保護主義者s for doing so, Tony Blair has 発表するd that he will do the decent thing and negate the 惑星-warming 影響s of his jet-力／強力にするd jaunt across the 大西洋.

By his 支払う／賃金ing into a '炭素 相殺する 計画／陰謀', he believes all will be 井戸／弁護士席. David Cameron thinks the same way. After he flew in a 私的な jet to see a glacier in Svalbard and blather on about his green 信任状 last April, Tory HQ 主張するd that rather than 存在 the 演習 in almost comically amateurish spin that it would さもなければ appear, Cameron's 北極の monkeying around was bona fide 気候-change 中立の.

For he, too, had bought a number of '炭素 credits' to mitigate the several トンs of 炭酸ガス emitted by his sumptuous conveyance.

炭素 offsetting has become an ultra-流行の／上流の way for the 豊富な middle classes to assuage their green 犯罪 by use of a little cash and 平等に scant thought.

The theory behind 炭素 offsetting is simple: you can 修理 the 損失 created by your flight - in the form of 放出／発行s of 炭酸ガス (the main man-made 温室 gas) - or other profligate 消費, such as 運動ing a gas-guzzling car, by 支払う／賃金ing an 相殺する 会社／堅い to 基金 the cutting of CO2 生産／産物 どこかよそで, for example by 工場／植物ing trees.

So you can still 飛行機で行く to the Caribbean

and the 良心-解放する／自由な answer is to grow a shrub. 現実に, someone else grows it for you - but it doesn't 事柄, your 犯罪 is still expunged.

Such is the 人気 of 炭素 offsetting that 得点する／非難する／２０s of 事業／計画（する）s, such as the 準備s for the 2012 オリンピック in London, will be labelled '炭素 中立の'.

Pop 禁止（する）d have also jumped on the bandwagon, （人命などを）奪う，主張するing to be 炭素-解放する／自由な ーに関して／ーの点でs of their 小旅行するs. Banks, 保険 companies, hedge funders and 外交官s are all offsetting like crazy. These 計画／陰謀s sound wonderfully simple. But how do they work? Indeed, do they work?

Apart from 工場／植物ing trees, another way is to 基金 energysaving 率先s, usually in the 第三世界. So you 飛行機で行く, for example, to Goa, and in return, a village どこかよそで in India is given half-a-dozen low-wattage light bulbs or a hundredth of a new 勝利，勝つd turbine.

In theory it all 追加するs up, but there are sceptics who 疑問 that such 計画／陰謀s work.

によれば a 最近の 報告（する）／憶測 in Nature magazine, there are myriad problems with such programmes. It said: 'The first problem is 簡単に calculating the 量 of 炭素 that needs to be 相殺する.'

Because the 量 of '損失' that is calculated 変化させるs so wildly, it is very tempting to 解任する it as guesswork.

The 炭素 中立の Company has worked out that a return flight from London to Bangkok 放出するs 2.1 トンs of CO2 per 乗客. This, it calculates, costs around £24 to 相殺する.

However, the 競争相手 UK 会社／堅い 気候 Care calculates the 人物／姿／数字 at 2.78 トンs - but reckons it will cost just £20.84 to make good the 環境の 負債 you 借りがある to 惑星 Earth. On the other 手渡す, スイスの-based myclimate thinks the flight will 生成する 3.6 トンs, and the German Atmosfair 6.9 トンs.

The discrepancies are 広大な. The truth is that it is very hard to calculate the 正確な, or even vague, 衝撃 on the 気候 of an individual 乗客 travelling by 空気／公表する.

All sorts of factors - the type of 航空機, the 大勝する, the 勝つ／広く一帯に広がるing 勝利，勝つd, and, most importantly, the number of empty seats on the 計画（する） - have to be taken into account.

But there are far greater problems tha n simple fuelconsumption discrepancies.

What happens if several individuals buy into the same 計画／陰謀? They will all believe that their 炭素 足跡 has been 相殺する but, of course, only one 始める，決める of windmills, new stoves or trees will have been bought.

Then there is the 問題／発行する of 査定する／（税金などを）課すing 未来 伸び（る）s as …に反対するd to 現在の losses.

If I 運動 a Bentley from London to Edinburgh, the several dozen キロs of CO2 that the 旅行 放出するs will 与える／捧げる to 気候 change straight away. Once the gas has been 解放（する）d into the atmosphere, there is nothing anyone can do. But the 伸び（る）s to be made from offsetting are not so simple.

によれば Michael Buick, of Oxford-based 気候 Care (which organises 炭素 offsetting for both the Tory Party and the 後見人 newspaper, which is - 自然に - obsessed with 減ずるing its own 炭素 足跡), it is a 'difficult question' to say for sure that the 炭素 offsetting you are 支払う／賃金ing for wouldn't have happened anyway.

If the £50 which you are told will 補償する for the 損失 原因（となる）d by your 炭素 放出／発行s, say, buys a dozen low-energy lightbulbs for a Tanzanian village, then how do you know that these lightbulbs would not have been 購入（する）d anyway?

And why the 強調 on 計画／陰謀s in the 第三世界? によれば 気候 Care, 支払う／賃金ing into 計画／陰謀s in countries that have 調印するd up to international 議定書s, such as Kyoto, would be pointless. It would 簡単に 減ずる 政府 and 商業の

But what about 基金ing 計画／陰謀s in hugely 汚染するing countries such as Australia and the U.S., which have not 調印するd up to Kyoto?

論理（学）上, 支払う／賃金ing 相殺する money into 計画／陰謀s that, say, 促進する 燃料-efficient cars in America or support Australian 核の 力／強力にする could have more 影響 on 気候 change than buying a 燃料- efficient stove in Bangladesh. But the 相殺する 会社／堅いs 収容する／認める that this would be a 非，不，無-starter.

Then there is the whole 厄介な 問題／発行する of what 正確に／まさに is th e best way to 相殺する in the first place. If you 工場／植物 a tree, it will indeed soak up CO2 from the atmosphere as it grows. But if you 燃やす that tree, or let it die and rot, all that 炭素 is put straight 支援する where it （機の）カム from.

But the main problem with offsetting is that it is, at best, a sticking plaster. If we are serious about 減ずるing 炭酸ガス 放出／発行s, then 簡単に 支払う／賃金ing £30 to a company every time we jet off to the tropics is the 同等（の） of putting a paper 捕らえる、獲得する over our 長，率いるs and wishing the problem away.

It isn't just the individual flight that 事柄s, it is the whole structure of 空気／公表する travel, the way we produce energy and the way we use (and lose) it that 事柄s.

Making us all feel 有罪の about going on holiday will not stop 気候 change, nor will 説 'here, 支払う／賃金 us a tenner and the 犯罪 will go away' have any real 影響, either.

It is 価値（がある） 明言する／公表するing, over and over again, that what is happening here and now - not only in the rich West but also in 中国, India and other growing economies - will dwarf any 試みる／企てる to put things 権利 by 工場／植物ing a few shrubs in Africa. If the green ロビー's worst 恐れるs are realised, we are going to have to live with an awful lot more 苦痛 than 支払う／賃金ing a few quid extra to 飛行機で行く to Spain.

But that won't stop the offsetters, of course. There is money in 犯罪 and money in 恐れる.

This much was realised about ten years ago, and it led to what may have been the greatest 反対／詐欺 trick in human history. When 恐れるs were 発言する／表明するd that there was a simple anomaly in the way computers 記録，記録的な／記録するd the date and the year, the 広大な／多数の／重要な millennium bug goldrush began.

No one knows やめる how much money was spent, but one American 商売／仕事 magazine 概算の that the world, in a 集団の／共同の, foolish panic, threw away about a 一兆 dollars 戦闘ing a 'problem' that turned out to be almost a 完全にする myth.

However, 気候 change is not a myth, and no one is 示唆するing the 相殺する fi rms are 冷笑的な larcenists like the myriad IT consultancies that sprang up on the 支援する of the Y2K hysteria. They 明確に mean 井戸／弁護士席 and seem to be making a 本物の 試みる／企てる to 供給する at least a 部分的な／不平等な 解答.

But if we 説得する ourselves that life can carry on, 商売／仕事 as usual, and all we need to do is shovel a few 続けざまに猛撃するs to an 相殺する 計画／陰謀 every now and then, we are 落ちるing for a myth every bit as 偽の as the millennium bug.

If the 総理大臣 wants to go on holiday to Florida, then that is his 商売／仕事. Criticising him for doing so 解任するs the Biblical line about motes and beams in one's 注目する，もくろむ. We are all 有罪の here.

Giving £100 or so to some 相殺する 会社／堅い may assuage his 良心 (and save his political bacon).

But the unpleasant reality is that if 気候 change is going to be as bad as the 信奉者s say - and it must be said that 開始するing 証拠 is not on the sceptics' 味方する - then buying a few eco-friendly lightbulbs for the 村人s of Assam will be little more than the 環境の 同等（の） of going to 自白.

It is good for the soul, perhaps, but of little 利益 to the 惑星 against which you have sinned.