|
Memorandum from The Carbon Line About www.thecarbonline.co.uk www.thecarbonline.co.uk exists to cut carbon emissions & to support business and individuals to reduce carbon emissions. We help business and individuals offset their remaining emissions & boost clean energy production and efficient energy use. We utilise offsets by installing energy efficiency measures and renewable energy systems on UK primary schools. This helps to reduce running costs of UK schools, ensuring more money can be spent on books rather than electricity costs and cuts carbon emissions from schools. Schools in the UK generate 15% of carbon emissions in the public sector. We therefore educate the next generation to be more efficient in using energy, and to use energy generated from clean sources. Our organisation is relevant to the Committees Inquiry as we strongly argue that technology can be used to cut carbon emissions in a verifiable way, whilst educating the public. Public concern over non technological offsets is genuine and the debate should focus on this. Some Inquiry Issues Ought there to be a compulsory UK or European accreditation scheme for carbon offset projects or companies? If so, how should this operate? Yes, in terms of a UK scheme because most offset companies in the world are based in the UK and therefore we really should take ownership. They should be accredited because there is genuine public concern over the effectiveness of schemes, particularly verification of actual carbon saved. We at thecarbonline.co.uk only use verifiable technologies such as energy efficiency equipment like insulation, heating systems, lighting and new ICT; renewable energy technologies such as wind, micro water generation, solar such as solar water heating and photo voltaics and ground source heat pumps. Therefore we are fully verifiable and would stand up to such an accreditation scheme. This would also ensure that the 'Arthur Daley offset schemes' (The Observer, 14.01.07) would be closed down and the public will have confidence that their offset actually offsets. Currently there are organisations which could verify technology for the purposes of accreditation. Should offsetting become mandatory for some of the more carbon-intensive activities, such as flying? Yes, and we should also consider household offsetting through an increase in the Energy Efficiency Commitment contributions. Households on low incomes could be exempt. This money could then be spent on bringing up current housing stock to a more energy efficient standard. Flying itself creates a difficulty in that the treasury has recently raised taxes to a similar amount to what an offset would cost. Is there enough clarity within the offset market to allow customers to make informed choices based upon robust information about different schemes at different prices? If there is an accreditation scheme available then customers could choose based on its robustness. Different prices occur because some projects are more expensive. We use expensive equipment, however we are verified and we also add value as we place our equipment on UK primary schools to educate the next generation about climate change. If we traded under such an accredited scheme we are confident that our customer base would increase, even though we may have a higher price than some in the market. Many offset projects involve afforestation or reforestation. Is the science sufficiently coherent in this area accurately to assess overall long-term carbon (or other GHG) gains and losses from such projects? We do not wish to be overly critical of organisations in the market; however we do not believe that forestry projects are sufficiently verifiable to guarantee offsets. This is why we have adopted a technological route which is easily verifiable and can stand up to intense scrutiny. We know exactly how much carbon we can save and so can be confident when dealing with customers that we are actually offsetting their carbon. Is there sufficient data available to guarantee accurate amounts of carbon or other GHG mitigation in the sorts of schemes which offset projects finance? No, which is why www.thecarbonline.co.uk is unique in that we can verifiably guarantee carbon emission savings. We have adopted this approach spefically because we were unhappy with some organisations in the market making wild claims and ultimately shattering confidence in carbon offsetting. We are delighted that the committee have taken this approach. What evidence is there to show that offsetting helps to change the carbon behaviour of the customer? The simple fact that a customer, in our case corporate or individual, has even considered offsetting suggests a level of concern which may not be apparent in others. Therefore we welcome this concern. To take it to the next level however, we at thecarbonline.co.uk offer advice on cutting emissions and lowering energy consumption. This holistic approach has to be the way forward. The question is what about the other 59.5 million citizens who haven't considered offsetting? We believe that educating the next generation is the most important thing we can do, which is why we provide equipment in schools, supplemented with curriculum materials that teachers relate to in their lessons. To what extent are the schemes and projects funded by offset companies more broadly sustainable, in an environmental, social or economic sense? At www.thecarbonline.co.uk we only source UK equipment so that we promote UK jobs and the growing renewable energy manufacturing industry. We also act to cut back our own carbon footprint. We use locally sourced materials where appropriate. For example, at a project in Yorkshire, we are to use local sheep wool to insulate school buildings. This helps sustain the farming community locally at the same time as reducing carbon emissions from the school. Conclusion We are absolutely delighted that the Committee have launched this inquiry. We would be happy to give verbal evidence to the Committee also as we feel we have much to offer Members.
January 2007 |