PJ's Carbon Footprint

2»

Comments

  • kenny olavkenny olav Posts: 3,319
    Hey, that means all of us donated that money! Glad we could help!

    http://music.yahoo.com/read/news/34001216

    Pearl Jam donates green for environment

    07/11/2006 7:37 PM, AP


    Pearl Jam has promised to donate $100,000 to several groups that focus on climate change, renewable energy and other environmental causes as part of an effort to offset carbon emissions the band churns out on tour.

    "Our Carbon Portfolio Strategy is the newest component of our ongoing efforts to advance clean renewable energy and carbon mitigation," the Seattle-based band said in a statement posted on its Web site Tuesday.

    Guitarist Stone Gossard said the group has been tracking its carbon emissions from vehicles used on tour and energy used in concert venues and hotels to estimate the band's contribution to global warming.

    "We can get a really relatively accurate picture of what that looks like over a year, and it's a considerable amount of carbon," Gossard told the Seattle Post-Intelligencer in a backstage interview at a concert in Los Angeles. "We emitted about 5,000 tons of carbon on our last tour."

    Cascade Land Conservancy and EarthCorps, which work to protect and replenish Puget Sound-area forests, are among nine organizations Pearl Jam picked to receive donations.

    One of the donations, to IslandWood, an environmental education center, will provide scholarships for children who can't afford tuition, spokeswoman Marla Saperstein said.

    The largest share of the group's donations will go to Conservation International, which does work does work in more than 40 countries.

    Pearl Jam has aided other green causes in the past, including donating money to preserve a Madagascar rain forest to atone for environmental damage wrought by its last tour.
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    i hate to burst everyone's environmental bubble, but you are all aware that so long as the fossil fuels are still coming out of the ground,where they belong, all the money in the world won't amount to anything. it'll make you feel less guilty, but that's about it.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • ScubascottScubascott Posts: 815
    tish wrote:
    My carbon footprint is extremely low for transportation. However, I have yet to teach myself how to maintain nutrition without eating meat.

    I volunteer with a local "environmental" organization, and PJ's post has made me want to investigate further on this organizations' carbon impact.

    Thanks for the links of outstanding anti-climate change groups. I swear the last book I read on socially responsible investments was explaining how cutting down forests was not that bad. *Jes**!*

    How does not eating meat reduce carbon emissions? Are you talking about the methane produced by the animals?
    It doesn't matter if you're male, female, or confused; black, white, brown, red, green, yellow; gay, lesbian; redneck cop, stoned; ugly; military style, doggy style; fat, rich or poor; vegetarian or cannibal; bum, hippie, virgin; famous or drunk-you're either an asshole or you're not!

    -C Addison
  • flywallyflyflywallyfly Posts: 1,453
    Scubascott wrote:
    How does not eating meat reduce carbon emissions? Are you talking about the methane produced by the animals?


    He is probably refering to the clearing of forests for cattle grazing that occurs in South America mainly (which ships beef to the U.S. as well).
  • ScubascottScubascott Posts: 815
    He is probably refering to the clearing of forests for cattle grazing that occurs in South America mainly (which ships beef to the U.S. as well).

    Ok. . . but you can't grow soybeans in a forest either. I don't understand the logic.
    It doesn't matter if you're male, female, or confused; black, white, brown, red, green, yellow; gay, lesbian; redneck cop, stoned; ugly; military style, doggy style; fat, rich or poor; vegetarian or cannibal; bum, hippie, virgin; famous or drunk-you're either an asshole or you're not!

    -C Addison
  • flywallyflyflywallyfly Posts: 1,453
    Scubascott wrote:
    Ok. . . but you can't grow soybeans in a forest either. I don't understand the logic.


    On a caloric value, it takes more land for cattle grazing to equal the energy derived from your example of soybeans which uses much less land. In other words, an acre of soybeans yields MUCH more food energy than an acre used for beef production. I hope that makes sense to you, I'm a little buzzed right now !
Sign In or Register to comment.