Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(NYPost)   This year's Oscar goodie bag includes a bunch of energy credits so our poor celebrities can keep using their limos and private jets guilt-free   (nypost.com) divider line
27
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

1241 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 27 Feb 2007 at 9:20 PM (16 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



27 Comments     (+0 »)
 
Number41
2007-02-27 8:53:58 PM  
That's the dumbest article I've ever read (who would have guessed it was from the Post?). Donating to charity = asinine? Informing people with money about a charity = asinine? Attacking a cause that helps the planet? Maybe that's the asinine part.
 
itazurakko
2007-02-27 9:15:44 PM  
Wait... they're slamming liberals for this?

This is EXACTLY the "market based solution" that the conservatives are always touting as the only plan, as opposed to any sort of usage moratoria.

So what gives?

/thinks there might be something to pollution trading credits
//if you insist on the market, you gotta make sure it prices all the bad side effects too, after all
 
Hal B. Sure
2007-02-27 10:12:04 PM  
Oh, I don't think it was keeping most of them up at night.
 
McBotulism
2007-02-27 10:22:13 PM  
I'll never understand the point of giving free stuff to the people who need free stuff the least. Where's Christopher Moltisanti when we need him?
 
xtigerr
2007-02-27 10:38:09 PM  
Energy credits are a joke. Smitty is exactly correct.
 
Delawheredad
2007-02-27 10:39:15 PM  
I could care less about the energy credits -- Hollywood is probably the single most wasteful industry in America. If Exxon was as careless with its resources as Hollywood is with theirs there would be an oil tanker wreck EVERY week.
The entertainment industry is the single most wasteful industry in America therefore its members have no business lecturing to us about our lifestyles.
 
Mugato [TotalFark]
2007-02-27 10:49:15 PM  
...b-b-but the Oscars went "green".
 
akula
2007-02-27 10:51:08 PM  
itazurakko: Wait... they're slamming liberals for this?

This is EXACTLY the "market based solution" that the conservatives are always touting as the only plan, as opposed to any sort of usage moratoria.

So what gives?

The idea is that those who proclaim the rest of us need to change our entire lifestyles (they did have that "Inconvenient Truth" song complete with moralizing at the Oscars) have enough money to buy their way out of having to make personal sacrifices. Yes, planting and protecting forests is wonderful, and doing it to offset your own carbon emissions is fine and dandy, but doing it while telling people who can't afford them to change everything they do for the good of the earth while you run around in your private jet really is hypocrisy. Maybe not rank hypocrisy, but at least a little bit.

Energy/emission credits, although they help soothe the conscience, are no better then just not emitting the crap in the first place.

The power of the market would be an earth-friendly product on the shelf right next to one that isn't; if the people care enough, they'll spend the money for the more efficient/less polluting item. This isn't market-driven as much as it is an excuse for the Hollywood limousine liberals to keep on living their wastrel lives.
 
The Hypnotoad
2007-02-27 10:52:38 PM  
I hate the word "goodie bag." It just sounds so self-indulgent. It makes me resent the celebrities who get them even more.

I also hate the word "two," but that's just because it looks weird if you stare at it long enough.
 
xtigerr
2007-02-27 10:53:30 PM  
I somehow doubt the climate cares about credits. More liberal bs.
 
Dufus
2007-02-27 10:56:23 PM  
Hmmm, from the article: "The greenhouse gas reductions will be accomplished through TerraPass' [program] of verified wind energy, cow power [collecting methane from manure] and efficiency projects."

Will be? Will be when? And are any of these programs existing or just plans on a drawing board that will never see daylight?
 
The Hypnotoad
2007-02-27 11:00:31 PM  
A donation has been made in your name to the Human Fund.

The Human Fund. Money for people.
 
Deece
2007-02-27 11:05:51 PM  
Damn you Hypnotoad!

Foiled again!
 
itazurakko
2007-02-27 11:15:48 PM  
akula: The idea is that those who proclaim the rest of us need to change our entire lifestyles (they did have that "Inconvenient Truth" song complete with moralizing at the Oscars) have enough money to buy their way out of having to make personal sacrifices. Yes, planting and protecting forests is wonderful, and doing it to offset your own carbon emissions is fine and dandy, but doing it while telling people who can't afford them to change everything they do for the good of the earth while you run around in your private jet really is hypocrisy. Maybe not rank hypocrisy, but at least a little bit.

That may be, but 99% of the people talking about emission credits are not the Hollywood elite, rather they are the scions of American Big Bidniz.

That's the part I find odd about the entire "OMG OHNOZ the hollyweird are buying the ability to pollute with their elitist planez!!" angle.

If anything, those on the left are usually more in favor of mandatory limits that would have people living in beehives.
 
biobob
2007-02-27 11:29:43 PM  
I looked this Terrapass up. Interesting concept, but how do we know this money if being invested properly? They talk about being audited on their site, but its not convincing. I don't know. Carbon credits seem like an odd idea.

On the other had, the envrionmental types out there who are pushing for the banning of the car, and stuff like that, need to calm down. Wacko or extreme ideas hurt your cause more than you can imagine. Sensible change is what should be preached, and not extreme lifestyle altering change.
 
AdamK
2007-02-27 11:45:50 PM  
i thought this year's oscars was weird, what with tom cruise's balding head suddenly appearing and giving some random lady nobody's heard of an oscar then disappearing... then some weird video supposed to show "America" through the movies but only being weird and chopped up itself with a big American flag at the end... then al gore and all the green advertisements and of course the obvious documentary choice of An Inconvenient Truth over more topical documentaries showing history in action in Iraq... then no movies sweeping the awards... the only highlight was Scorcese getting the oscar... otherwise just a boring, weird night
 
Brubold
2007-02-28 12:09:59 AM  
This is "do as I say, not as I do" taken to the extreme.

"That's right all you poor people. You need to change the way you do everything to make the world safe from global warming. Now excuse me while I fly in my private jet across the globe telling all the other poor people how to live.

What? Me? No I don't have to do any of that stuff. You see, I have the money to pretend I'm giving as much back from the Earth as I'm taking. Isn't that convenient for me?"
 
Pine Oil Funeral
2007-02-28 2:30:37 AM  
If there was ever a need for a glass parking lot, hollywood is it.
 
ActualFarkal
2007-02-28 3:48:36 AM  
So they donated these Terrapasses to the celebrities. Does that mean any actual money traded hands? Does one Terrapass guarantee such and such amount of dollars to wildlife or environment funds? Or is this the usual splash of hypocrisy and garbage Hollywood spits back out once it's done blowing itself?

And now that I look at it, that's probably the best metaphor I've ever written on Fark.
 
nemoxnine
2007-02-28 7:50:20 AM  
Farking shiat.

People donate to charity and this is the response they get.

Hollywood types should "set an example"? Donating (or having donations made in their name) isn't setting an example? Giving to environmentally-friendly causes isn't setting an example?

Al Gore tells people to live carbon neutral. He had a ridiculous electricity bill. Why? Because he bought clean energy. That's what the tells people to do, that's what he did. Whether or not you agree with him, THIS IS practicing what you preach. How do you criticize that?

Hollywood as a whole tells people to live carbon neutral. The Oscars went green. They donated TerraPasses to the attendees (basically making charitable donations in their names) to offset the environmental impact of their cars, limos, whatever. That's what they're asking people to do, that's what they did. Whether or not you agree with them, THIS IS practicing what you preach. How the hell do you criticize that?

You can either be more energy efficient, or donate to environmental charities to offset your impact on the environment. They're implicitly saying "either one is better than nothing."

One of these TerraPasses costs $50, and claims to offset the effect of your driving for one year. Doesn't sound like much, does it? But when there are 196,000,000 drivers in the US, we're talking about $10 billion if everyone contributes that much to offset the effect of their driving, per year.

All you people who biatch about "do as I say, not as I do" - what did you contribute to environmental causes last year? If you did contribute that's great. How is what you're doing any different than what Hollywood's doing?

I know I didn't contribute to any charities last year, but I did do one important thing:

I didn't biatch about people who did live more efficient lives, and I didn't biatch about people who donated to charities.

/rant OFF
//with a vengence
 
Billygoat Gruff
2007-02-28 8:31:08 AM  
I cut up those plastic six pack holder rings so no animals get caught in them. What kind of credit I get for that?
 
efinkelnburg
2007-02-28 9:53:11 AM  
nemoxnine

I don't know if you can legitimately call TerraPass a "charity." I'm still not sold on the idea of energy credits, and to be honest, their whole program seems (seems, mind you) scammish.

A bunch of people -- many of whom are completely blinded by idealism -- give a bunch of money to a company that claims to invest in green-energy programs around the globe. What percentage of money do they invest? How does investing in wind power in Germany reduce and offset My carbon emissions in the states? There are plenty of questions that need to be asked, because the whole setup seems like bunk science thats allowing people to live with a clean conscience even though very little (or nothing at all) is really being done to help the environment.

Besides-- if someone is going to make a donation to a charity in the name of celebrities, why not one of the many still operating in the south trying to rebuild in the aftermath of Katrina? New Orleans wasn't the only city that got destroyed, and many areas of neighboring states today look exactly like they did the first morning after the storm dissipated.
 
Farkn Yaj Yenrac [BareFark]
2007-02-28 10:00:41 AM  
itazurakko
That may be, but 99% of the people talking about emission credits are not the Hollywood elite, rather they are the scions of American Big Bidniz.

That's the part I find odd about the entire "OMG OHNOZ the hollyweird are buying the ability to pollute with their elitist planez!!" angle.

If anything, those on the left are usually more in favor of mandatory limits that would have people living in beehives.

That must be why all those episodes of Cribs show the celebrities in their 500 s.f. apartments. They, just like most people, would be happy with "people living in beehives" to promote efficiency, just so long as their own lifestyle isn't affected.
This TerraPass thing isn't a bad idea, but it's not a free pass to pollute away, either. Also, don't forget that the stuff in those gift bags is given away for promotional purposes, so these TerraPasses are paid for by the profits that this company is making off of the average Joe.
 
akula
2007-02-28 11:03:38 AM  
itazurakko: That may be, but 99% of the people talking about emission credits are not the Hollywood elite, rather they are the scions of American Big Bidniz.

Yeah, because under international treaties, the "developing" nations get to pollute more, and it means $$$ if they sell those credits to first world nations like the US.

Paying money to "offset" your own pollution is like donating money to a domestic violence charity so you don't feel bad about beating the hell out of your wife or kids. Yeah, it's better than doing nothing while beating them, but better to control yourself.

Just do the little things- CFBs, more efficient appliances, insulate, maybe go for a more efficient vehicle. Screaming that we need to revert to a localized agrarian economy is full of crap.
 
MoeSzyslak
2007-02-28 11:33:56 AM  
itazurakko [TotalFark]

If anything, those on the left are usually more in favor of mandatory limits that would have people everyone but them living in beehives.

Fixed it for ya
 
pellypell
2007-02-28 12:58:47 PM  
Christopher Moltisanti, are you listening?
 
efinkelnburg
2007-03-01 3:10:27 AM  
akula

Paying money to "offset" your own pollution is like donating money to a domestic violence charity so you don't feel bad about beating the hell out of your wife or kids. Yeah, it's better than doing nothing while beating them, but better to control yourself.

First, I LOL'd at that.

Second, I don't beat my wife. Can I start trading "Domestic Abuse Offset Credits" that serial abusers can buy to use as passes out of jail? That'd be sweet...

/And its essentially the gist of TerraPass
//From what I can see, anyway...
 
Displayed 27 of 27 comments


Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

If you like these links, you'll love

TotalFark

$10 a month since 19 aught diddly.

learn more | sign up
On Twitter

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.