From the Editorial section of 'The Economist', Aug 5th-11th, 2006 edition:
'Sins of Emission' is an editorial that discusses "carbon offset trading". There is a more detailed article on page 53 of this issue. More later when I read this. The greatest admission of this editorial is that there are two reasons for carbon offsetting. The first is "allows consumers to quell their eco-guilt even as they jet off to distant climes on holidays, and drivers of sports-utility vehicles to argue that they have atoned for the emissions produced by their gas guzzling cars". The second is that "image polishing companies that declare themselves carbon-neutral may have public relations as well as environmental benefits in mind". In other words the priests of a managerial market cater to the religious desires of a leftoid demographic that wants ritual absolution.
The editorial discusses various flaws of the carbon trading schemes, but perhaps a fuller discussion would best be left to the time after I have read the full article AND ALSO read the article in 'The New Internationalist' that anticipated this article by about a month. Not that carbon trading hasn't been up for discussion for some time, but I'd like to compare 'The Economist' and 'The New Internationalist'.