It is not in any way that I can ascertain 'helpful' to take refuge in 
making/quoting comments like this. ENRON bosses were charged and found 
guilty of fraudulent accounting. Carbon accounting [envisaging profits 
from ENRON-provided permits for carbon offests] was a part of this fraud.

To simply assert that CSR is the equivalent of legal because making 
financial profit is the law and to accept that, is to say that the law 
is an ass [what's new] and saying this does not lead to correction of 
error. If it were/is true, the law would/will need to be changed. If the 
law is to be changed, we have to put forward an improved law and before 
this we will obviously now have to deal with carbon accounting in the 
light of the distinction that follows: -

There are two forms of carbon accounting: -

  1. zero-carbon accounting, unambigous - *absolutely *no emissions
     from fossil fuel et al - defensible, if difficult.

  2. carbon-neutral accounting, a 'net' calculation riddled with
     ambiguity and unquantifiable benefit. It is presented as
     *relatively* no emissions from fossil fuel et al but is almost
     invariably indefensible where 'ease' is the co-effcient of
     ineffectual practice and probably sentient 'cheating' as well.

Before the: -

  1. latest explanations of psychologically frail scientists are found and
  2. the rather fanciful-sounding 'choice' between reform and
     revolution is posed
 
. . . my question [originally to George Marshall] to any is the still 
the same and still so far unanswered: -

Since the 'literacy' of understanding the 'carbon/climate-problem[s]' - 
developed, 'psychological' or not - apparently has the same 
petrification effect as looking at face of Medusa, what 
methodology/application of numeracy and accounting is relevant to 
informing and guiding the 'solution' to the climate dilemma?

The solution unavoidably has be generated faster than we generate the 
problem. So the question is how do we set out the basis of measuring that?

Aubrey
> Dear Aubrey and all,
>  
> We all need to remember that CSR is only legal if it is fake, a PR 
> exercise to win more customers.  The bottom line has to be profit, by 
> law!
> (Source: Bakan, Joel 2004 'The Corporation' Constable & Robinson Ltd., 
> pp 45 & 41)
>  
> Jim
>  
> *Visit: http//:www.save-our-world.net (global) and * 
> *www.save-our-world.org.uk* <http://www.save-our-world.org.uk>
> *Registered charity no. 1111210 in England & Wales*
>  
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Aubrey Meyer" < [log in to unmask] 
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]> >
> To: < [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> >
> Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 2:33 PM
> Subject: The CRISIS is the the Collapse of Common Sense
>
> Jonathon Porritt yesterday called for "radical action to prevent a
> climate catastrophe" and then endorses BP's hew scheme ["TargetNeutral"
> see below].
>
> Joined by other Green Luvlies Ed Mayo et al, JP endorses BP's scheme
> into which motorists can now pay £20/year [to BP's 'charity'] for
> motoring and consciences cleansed of emissions and impact. Jonathon's
> comment is, this will make people 'carbon-literate' [sic].
>
> As Eliza Doolittle said; "Words Words Words, I am so sick of Words!!"
>
> It gets worse . . . then comes the clearest and crassest example of [is
> it?] 'involuntary dishonesty' [I have no way of knowing] in the climate
> change policy debate.
>
> The new title of the "Stop Climate Chaos" lobby is [hold your breath . .
> . .!] "I Count" [sic - Don't wet your pants] . . . If only that were true.
> http://www.brandrepublic.com/bulletins/digital/article/588948/climate-change-campaign-drive-recruit-supporters/ 
> <http://www.brandrepublic.com/bulletins/digital/article/588948/climate-change-campaign-drive-recruit-supporters/> 
>
>
>
> It is 'carbon-numeracy' that is needed. "I count" should promise so much
> but its authors have a history of delivering so little. The trouble is
> that the opposite is true - they <don't count> and they <won't count>
> i.e. emissions:concentrations build-up per unit time and the C&C rates
> needed to avoid a climate catastrophe.
> http://www.gci.org.uk/briefings/rising_risk.pdf 
> <http://www.gci.org.uk/briefings/rising_risk.pdf>
>
> And it is precisely because the leadership of this campaign [Greenpeace
> WWF etc al] <don't> count [and indeed refuse to numerate or to be
> accountable about that], that the policy debate flounders from bad to
> worse and the commercial sector goes deeper and deeper into dither and
> drift [see FT below].
>
> Read the history of this here: -
> http://www.gci.org.uk/briefings/RSA_Occasional_Paper.pdf 
> <http://www.gci.org.uk/briefings/RSA_Occasional_Paper.pdf>
>
> The White Coats won't take the consequences of their insights, so the
> government blesses the 'no-focus-groups' and public resources are
> marshalled all over again again into creating the problem faster than we
> even contemplate [let alone count] trying to solve it . . . . e.g. yet
> more cut-price air-travel - you can just see Ryan Air offering to
> fart-in-a-jar to reduce impact.
>
> The climate camp should read the riot act . . .
> http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/08/349015.html 
> <http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/08/349015.html>
>
> Pentcho, Walt - The crisis is immediate; it is not whether the speed of
> light is constant or not, the crisis is our passivity in the face of the
> collapse of common sense.
>
> Aubrey
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> BP Launches targetneutral^TM
>
> UK's first mainstream scheme to "neutralise" the CO2 emissions caused by
> driving
>
> UK drivers can now neutralise the CO2 emissions caused by their driving
> through targetneutral, a non-profit making partnership initiative from
> BP that launches today.
>
> Road transport accounts for 22 per cent of UK CO2 emissions. The
> straight-forward scheme, available at www.targetneutral.com 
> <http://www.targetneutral.com>
> < http://email.bpglobal.com/re?l=1hlqxsIezxzp2Ia 
> <http://email.bpglobal.com/re?l=1hlqxsIezxzp2Ia> >, enables all 
> drivers to
> take direct action to reduce their individual impact on climate change
> by funding CO2 reductions generated from environmental projects.
>
> www.targetneutral.com <http://www.targetneutral.com> < 
> http://email.bpglobal.com/re?l=1hlqxsIezxzp2Ib 
> <http://email.bpglobal.com/re?l=1hlqxsIezxzp2Ib> >
> allows a driver to calculate the cost of the annual CO2 reduction
> required to make their vehicle CO2 neutral. An average car, driven
> 10,000 miles in a year, generates approximately four tonnes of CO2. To
> neutralise this amount of carbon emissions via www.targetneutral.com 
> <http://www.targetneutral.com>
> < http://email.bpglobal.com/re?l=1hlqxsIezxzp2Ic 
> <http://email.bpglobal.com/re?l=1hlqxsIezxzp2Ic> > will cost around £20 a
> year.
>
> Four tonnes is the equivalent of filling a medium sized hot air balloon
> with pure CO2. A huge amount of CO2 could be neutralised if all 40
> million drivers in the UK signed up to targetneutral.
>
>
> The scheme has been developed in consultation with leading NGOs and will
> be advised and monitored by an independent Advisory and Assurance Panel
> chaired by Jonathon Porritt, Founder Director of Forum for the Future
> www.forumforthefuture.org.uk <http://www.forumforthefuture.org.uk>
> < http://email.bpglobal.com/re?l=1hlqxsIezxzp2Id 
> <http://email.bpglobal.com/re?l=1hlqxsIezxzp2Id> >. The Panel comprises
> Professor David Begg, Chairman of Tube Lines; Rita Clifton, Chairman of
> Interbrand; Steve Koonin, BP's Chief Scientist; Peter Mather, BP's Head
> of Country, UK; Ed Mayo, CEO National Consumer Council; Charles Secrett,
> Independent Advisor and former Director Friends of the Earth; Tim Smit,
> CEO The Eden Project; Professor Kathy Sykes, Professor of Public
> Engagement in Science & Engineering, Bristol University.
>
> Peter Mather, BP's Head of Country, UK said: "targetneutral is a
> practical and straightforward step that BP is taking to enable drivers
> to help the environment. BP is taking the lead because our extensive
> research shows that there is a huge consumer demand for such a scheme,
> but a general feeling from customers that they 'don't know where to
> start'. "
>
> Jonathon Porritt, Founder Director, Forum for the Future and Chairman of
> the targetneutral Advisory and Assurance Panel said: "The scientific
> consensus on climate change is overwhelming: we need to take radical
> action now if we are to avoid catastrophic consequences. We all have a
> responsibility to take up that challenge in our own lives, at home, work
> or as motorists. For this reason, Forum for the Future is very
> supportive of what BP is doing through targetneutral. The scheme should
> help raise awareness of the links between driving and climate change.
> Helping everyone get more 'carbon literate' is something that all oil
> companies will need to commit to in the very near future".
>
> *It's simple to take direct action. Motorists need to:*
> 1. log on to www.targetneutral.com <http://www.targetneutral.com>
> < http://email.bpglobal.com/re?l=1hlqxsIezxzp2Ie 
> <http://email.bpglobal.com/re?l=1hlqxsIezxzp2Ie> >
> 2. follow a simple procedure that helps calculate the number of litres
> of fuel used each year and the CO2 emissions generated
> 3. the www.targetneutral.com <http://www.targetneutral.com>
> < http://email.bpglobal.com/re?l=1hlqxsIezxzp2If 
> <http://email.bpglobal.com/re?l=1hlqxsIezxzp2If> > 'calculator' then
> determines the financial contribution needed to buy the CO2 reduction to
> neutralise these emissions.
> 4. in addition, by registering their Nectar card, they trigger a BP
> contribution every time they use their card when buying fuel at a BP
> forecourt
>
> *The role of targetneutral in CO2 reduction*
> targetneutral works best within the REDUCE, REPLACE, NEUTRALISE
> framework. These are three practical steps that all motorists can take
> to tackle their personal CO2 emissions.
>
> REDUCE emissions as much as possible by changing attitudes and behaviour
> to use less fuel and be more fuel efficient. This will save money too.
>
> REPLACE the fuel, oil, tyres and car with more fuel efficient products
> and models, specifically high efficiency diesel vehicles, when possible.
>
> NEUTRALISE the effects of the CO2 emissions that cannot be reduced or
> replaced by joining targetneutral.
>
> *BP's role in targetneutral*
> BP has initiated targetneutral, providing all set-up funding and will
> meet all ongoing running costs.
>
> All targetneutral members' money, apart from VAT and payment transaction
> costs, buys CO2 emission reductions via the purchase of carbon credits.
> BP takes nothing from the scheme members' contribution.
>
> BP will make a direct contribution to targetneutral when motorists who
> are signed up to the scheme register and use their Nectar Card when they
> buy fuel at a BP forecourt.
>
> The BP contribution is calculated per litre and is up to 10p per tank
> for regular fuels and up to 20p per tank for lower CO2-emitting BP
> Ultimate fuels. BP has 1 million customers per day in the UK.
>
> *The projects*
> The money generated by targetneutral goes to a portfolio of CO2
> reduction projects including alternative and renewable energy. Replacing
> traditional energy production methods with low CO2 emitting
> alternatives, is one way CO2 reductions are achieved. Initially there
> are five projects including a biomass energy plant in Himachal Pradesh;
> a wind farm in Karnataka, India and an animal waste management and
> methane capture program in Mexico. As targetneutral grows, more projects
> will be added.
>
> Strict procedures are followed to ensure the projects' integrity. These
> are modelled on those created by the UNFCCC (United Nations Framework
> Convention on Climate Change) for emissions reduction projects developed
> under the Kyoto Protocol. All project activity is overseen by the
> targetneutral Advisory and Assurance Panel.
>
> For further information, please contact LAUNCH GROUP:
>
> Electronic press kit available at:
> www.launchgroup.co.uk/epk/targetneutral 
> <http://www.launchgroup.co.uk/epk/targetneutral>
> < http://email.bpglobal.com/re?l=1hlqxsIezxzp2Ig 
> <http://email.bpglobal.com/re?l=1hlqxsIezxzp2Ig> >
>
> Name: David Page
> Phone: 020 7758 3907
> Email: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> < 
> mailto:[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> >
>
> Name: Oshy Phillips
> Phone: 020 7758 3917
> Email: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> < 
> mailto:[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> >
>
> Name: Chris Seymour
> Phone: 020 7758 3926
> Email: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> < 
> mailto:[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> >
>
> Name: Elodie Massol
> Phone: 020 7758 3920
> Email: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> < 
> mailto:[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> >
>
> Name: Switchboard
> Phone: 020 7758 3900
>
> Climate-change policies 'confusing'
>
> By Fiona Harvey
>
> Published: July 31 2006 03:00 | Last updated: July 31 2006 03:00
>
> Businesses are confused by the government's policies on climate change and
> the lack of clarity is hampering investment decisions, a survey of FTSE
> 100 companies has found.
>
> Sixty per cent of companies surveyed by Investec Asset Management said
> government policy on the problem was not clear enough for them to make
> important investment decisions. Among the FTSE 350, 53 per cent of
> companies said government policy was not clear.
>
> John Hildebrand, fund manager at Investec, said: "If companies don't know
> what is happening [with government policy] then that creates problems.
> There is no clarity, for example, on what will happen post-2012 [when the
> current provisions of the Kyoto protocol expire]."
> The main policy instrument used by the government to curb emissions is the
> European Union's greenhouse gas emissions trading scheme, under which
> energy-intensive companies are issued with tradeable permits for the
> amount of carbon dioxide they can emit. The government indicated in a
> recent energy review that it could extend emissions trading to other
> companies but said the plans would not be set out until later this year.
>
> Mr Hildebrand said some respondents to the survey severely criticised the
> lack of indication as to the direction of the emissions trading scheme
> beyond 2012. For instance, National Grid had said the short-term nature of
> the emissions reduction targets under the scheme was "not consistent with
> investment timescales".
>
> However, in spite of the confusion over the government's policies, more
> than nine in 10 companies said they regarded climate change as a
> significant issue and seven in 10 were publicly reporting their emissions.
> About seven in 10 also regarded the emissions trading scheme as a good way
> of limiting emissions.
>
> Fiona Harvey
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.5/426 - Release Date: 23/08/2006
>