Positive, Neutral, or Responsible?
This content of the post (below) is actually a steal from Andrew Zolli; I don’t make a habit of lifting complete quotes without comment (in fact this is a first) but I liked his idea of addressing the ‘Carbon Neutral’ term we are all now getting ‘familiar’ with.
Andrew is a futurologist I linked up whilst at Bruce Mau Design half a decade ago, I remember thinking then what a fascinating line of work it must be to reflect on and plot the future everyday.
And if you are wondering, the above model depicts the fullerene: one of the eight different molecular configurations which can be formed entirely of pure carbon. And now, here’s the post:
Carbon Positive, Carbon Negative, or Carbon Responsible?
“To some the glass is half empty, to others half full. It appears this question of perspective is also afflicting those looking at going beyond carbon neutral. Two terms are being used interchangeably despite being opposites: carbon positive & carbon negative.
In both cases people are referring to offsetting or sequestering more carbon dioxide than is emitted. To date, neither Wikipedia nor Google definitions has weighed in on this matter.
As the point is to leave less CO2 in the atmosphere than you put in, we at Z+ think it makes sense to call it carbon negative.
We are however willing to concede that offsetting beyond neutrality is a positive thing to do!”
Text by Andrew Zolli, from the Z+ blog
|