Scooping the New York Times
May 1st, 2007
The New York Times is my favorite newspaper. Amidst all the media that I consume, it holds a disproportionately influential place in my life. It is a pleasure to read. In fact a number of columns I have written for this blog have been reflections on an article that I read in the Times. So it thrilled me today when I opened the Times and saw that www.evolutionshift.com had scooped it.
Several weeks ago, I wrote a column about Planktos and interviewed its founder and CEO Russ George. I had met Russ at a unique conference about the future of energy and humanity hosted by the Foundation for the Future and was so taken with his vision and what he was doing that I prevailed upon him to be interviewed. Just last week we met up again at a ‘green business convention’ in Chicago. He had just made the entire convention carbon neutral and had also made Mayor Daley’s car carbon neutral for a year. He does this by the planting of thousands of acres of trees in Eastern Europe and, more interestingly the seeding of vast plankton blooms in the Ocean. Both the trees and the plankton blooms absorb vast amounts of CO2, thus allowing Russ to build a business of carbon offsets, which helps the Earth survive until we can replace fossil fuels as our primary source of energy.
So it was with great delight that I opened today’s New York Times and saw that the cover story in the Business Day section was about Planktos with a nice big picture of Russ. Of course the Times had to cover both sides of the story, providing voice to critics of Russ’s methods, similar to the way that the media used to present both ‘sides’ of the global warming issue several years ago before it became clear that there is only one ‘side’ to that issue. Since the Times is ‘the paper of record’ I am happy that the vital yet simple way that Planktos is working to help fight global warming received such large coverage.
By the way you can go to the Planktos web site and buy carbon offsets for your household. I purchased carbon offsets for a year for my fiancés and my homes and cars. Until we can all dramatically lower our energy consumption, drive electric cars and lower toxic emissions, we should help Russ and the crew of his ship Weather Bird II seed plankton in our oceans.
While hundreds of thousands of people today ‘read it in the New York Times’ I hope that several hundred of readers of this blog saw the article and thought ‘I read about this first at www.evolutionshift.com!’
May 1st, 2007 at 10:01 am
I would be wary of any company that sells carbon offsets. A lot of them are a scam.
May 1st, 2007 at 10:15 am
it is good to hear about entrepreneurs doing things for the ‘greater good’, as well as their own benefit.
May 1st, 2007 at 11:12 am
I know I “read it here first”. Keep “scooping” and helping our world and the world we leave for children, be a better place.
May 1st, 2007 at 3:05 pm
As a matter of fact I read “my favorite newspaper” too this morning and thought “Gee, I read about this guy in David’s blog.” Keeit up!
May 3rd, 2007 at 9:33 am
I’d like to know more about Planktos. The critics seem to have these opinions
1. It’s a scam
2. Planting trees in Europe to offset carbon here is like planting pine trees in New York because you don’t have enough pine trees in Jamaca. The offset needs to be placed around where the credits are bought for it to actually help
3. Given than developing oceans is a relatively new science (2 centuries it says on the site, however observations relative to climate change cannot go that far back) shouldn’t this be run under controlled models long before implemented on a global scale.
I don’t see any solid replies to the three questions above on their site.
Given the state of most companies, and the promises of a rainmaker-style business model (it’s helping, we promise, it’s just that no one can measure how much we are affecting things including ourselves) how can you be so much in support of it.
I think a lot of people would be more willing to invest if there were more oversight, or evidence of cause/effect. i.e. I buy 10 credits and I could actually read a meter that shows the effects of those 10 credits. A corporation buys 1000 credits and the effect is obvious.
Even then, it would have to be based on observable data, rather than predictions based on unknown formula.
Until I know that what he is doing is actually helping, and how much it is helping, I won’t be parting with my money.
I’m all for carbon neutral as long as people are, in fact, becoming carbon neutral. If they pay someone to “feel carbon neutral” and that person is either causing no effect, too much effect, or an effect in the wrong part of the globe, that I cannot support.