Q: Why are we including offsetting?
A: We recognise that flying creates much higher pollution than
other means of transport per mile. One return flight to Bangkok
creates 2.78 tonnes of CO2 per passenger - that's more than that
generated from my one bedroom flat in a year, consumed in just 11
hours! This may be contributing to global warming. Offsetting gives
us a means of redressing the balance
Q: How did you arrive at the figures on my invoice?
A: Our offset supplier, Climate Care, have a means of calculating
the each passenger's share of the carbon dioxide produced on any
particular flight route. The price you pay is the cost to offset
that amount of CO2. We are working on a figure of average £7.50 per
tonne of CO2.
Q: You have removed my personal choice of offset provider!
A: Sorry! We have to make all sorts of decisions regarding
suppliers on our tours, airlines we use, charities we support,
etc. We believe strongly that doing something about pollution
should not be optional.
Q: You have removed my personal choice of whether to offset or
not!
A: Sorry! We believe strongly that doing something about pollution
should not be optional. (See more below)
Q: I want to support my own charities.
A: Climate Care is not a charity. It is a service (see below).
Q: You are not educating people about global warming this
way.
A: We believe it sends a stronger message to make people pay for a
service, and thereby make the link between their actions and the
climate, than simply giving them the option to offset or packaging
offsets as donating money to 'good works'. Fact is most people are
not choosing to offset and we don't think this is because they do
not believe in it. We accept some people may find this heavy handed
but we believe strongly that doing something about pollution should
not be optional.
Q: But I don't believe aviation is a contributor to global
warming…it's all hype blaming flying…
A: We respect your opinion and recognise there are different views
on the subject - it is a very complex scientific issue. However, it
is beyond a doubt that emissions from aircraft are significant
pollutants, regardless of one's opinion on global warming and air
travel is growing so much quicker than any other sector. There's
been an increase of 87% in Europe since 1990! As such, if there are
ways of reducing the pollution caused, we should take them up i.e.
by offsetting. We should all look at the bigger picture and look at
all the ways we can reduce our carbon footprint. We do a lot on
tour and in our office too!
Q: You are hypocrites as you are encouraging people to
fly!
A: It is the individual's choice where, how and how often to
travel and to weigh that against other activities in their lives.
Aviation is a relatively small contributor to greenhouse gases
overall (5.5% in the UK, as opposed to 20% for road transport and
17% for domestic use) but it is still significant and it's growing.
We are actually highlighting the issue and making people aware of
the environmental impacts of their travels - a brave move for an
operator!
Q: Should we stop travelling?
A: No. Many countries rely on tourism and this would devastate many
economies, badly affecting their ability to provide basic services
to their people. Furthermore, we operate responsibly; benefiting
people more directly than many operators by supporting small local
businesses and many charities and promoting good ethical and
environmental practice. We should all travel more responsibly
rather than stop travelling.
Q: I don't believe in offsetting - the government should be
doing something.
A: Indeed! There are many things that government should be doing.
Think of all the medical charities there are… Climate Care was
actually founded before the Kyoto Protocol existed! Government is
moving, though not quickly enough, so do continue to campaign on
this issue. In the meantime there is a choice; do something
practical by offsetting or do nothing. We choose to do
something.
Q: I don't believe in offsetting - you can't pretend that all is
OK just coz you've offset.
A: We are not pretending that all is OK. We recognise and publicise
the impacts and do not claim offsetting is a way to be 'carbon
neutral' - that is too difficult to prove. We are however doing
something to address the pollution our trips cause by investing in
schemes which deliver demonstrable carbon reductions. Better than
doing nothing. Climate Care have delivered over 1m tonnes of carbon
reductions over the relatively short period they have been working
- solid evidence that offsetting delivers results.
Q: You are just supporting small industries that are not
sustainable in the long term.
A: We are giving these industries the financial helping hand they
need to get off the ground. All the projects are initiated locally
- they just need backers. We are creating the demand for the
projects. And they work! It would take a 2kWh home solar panel in
the UK 2000 years to make the same carbon savings as could be made
in a single year through investing the same money in Climate Care's
Indian foot-powered water pump project.
Q: I'm still not convinced and don't want to pay.
A: I am sorry about that but this is not an optional cost. The
money will go to invest in energy efficient schemes in developing
countries which have many environmental, economic and sometimes
health benefits for local people. These are worthwhile projects in
their own right, regardless of views on global warming and
offsetting. We recognise that there will be different views on
offsetting and global warming but we hope that all customers will
share (or at least respect) our belief and action in encouraging
sustainable tourism and development. It is core to Explore's
ethos.
Q: Why did you choose Climate Care?
A: We have worked with Climate Care for a number of years to offset
our staff flights and offer a voluntary offset to our customers. We
conducted some research and found Climate Care to have the most
robust verification processes for their projects, ensuring that
projects were demonstrable carbon reduction schemes. They rate very
highly in independent reports on good practice: they rated top in
Clean Air Cool Planet's 'Consumer's Guide to Retail Carbon Offset
Providers', Dec 2006
Q: But Climate Care are not a charity; they make a profit…
A: There is no reason why they should be a charity. We are paying
for a service which we do not consider should be optional. It sends
a stronger message to make people pay for a service, and thereby
make the link between their actions and the climate, than simply
giving them the option or packaging offsets as donating money to
good works. It is better for Climate Care not to be a charity as
this way they can attract larger investment in the private sector.
The profits are limited to 10% which we think is reasonable.
Q: I've seen Climate Care's management fees are high…
A: They are proportionate to the work involved in finding suitable
projects and verifying the carbon reductions. Good projects require
good management. The management fees for our projects are less than
investing in the general portfolios and an average of 65% of what
we pay goes directly to the project.
Q: It's all about planting trees, isn't it? I've heard that
doesn't work…
A: Tree planting does work. It is however quite complex to measure
and the offset is over a very long time, there is more risk. Most
offset providers are moving away from tree planting to invest in
technologies where carbon savings are quicker, larger and more
easily calculated. Climate Care limit reliance on forestry for
offsets and it is around just 5% of their project portfolio. It is
important to reduce emissions, not just absorb them. Climate Care
do have an excellent project in Kibale Forest, Uganda, that we
support - see below!
Q: What projects are you supporting?
A: India
Explore is exclusively providing the carbon funding for this
innovative renewable energy scheme in Pune, Maharashtra. Waste from
sugarcane production, called bagasse, is being used instead of coal
and oil to fuel a factory which processes waste paper into
cardboard products - a double environmental benefit! This kind of
fuel is called biomass and is renewable (ie grows back!) and
furthermore is carbon neutral in that it would have decayed been
burned and released all it's CO2 anyway. As well as the
environmental benefits, the cost savings from using waste, rather
than coal, are significant and local employment is being generated
in a poor area. This project gives an economic value to biomass,
enabling farmers to use waste products for economic gain, and
kick-starts demand for sustainable fuels.
CO2 saving: 12,000 tonnes over one year. Explore investment
£75,000.
Uganda
Simply 'planting a tree' is not an answer to carbon offsetting as
in time this tree will die and re-release its carbon into the
atmosphere or may be destroyed by forest fire. The best approach is
to plant a mixed forest on an area that has been deforested so that
it can re-grow into a stable ecosystem. In Kibale Forest NP,
Climate Care are replanting native species in areas previously
cleared by felling, thus increasing the habitat for wildlife. The
new plantations are under the protection of the National Park.
This, along with the fact that the forest develops a natural fire
resistance1 in a short period, means that the risk of
the trees dying or being felled is limited. This project is
certified by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and employs 400
people in the Kibale area.
CO2 saving: 1 hectare of rainforest = 400 tonnes of CO2 per year.
Explore investment £45,000.
Q: How do you know they are reducing carbon?
A: Climate Care have a very detailed verification process.
Verification is conducted by experts who verify projects under the
international Clean Development Mechanism. We have access to their
reports.