There's still an ongoing argument over whether carbon credits are truly a legitimate solution for lowering carbon emissions. As developing countries such as China and India see a spike in their emissions levels (China just took over the stop spot), the slower rate of technological development and the growing economies there mean that this problem is only going to get worse. Countries like Canada and the U.S. have until 2012 to lower their emissions according to Kyoto, however developing countries are not under any type of restrictions for theirs.

As Lorrie Goldstein, a columnist for the Toronto Sun puts it:

First, buying and selling carbon credits doesn't remove one molecule of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

Second, carbon credits weren't designed to lower emissions. They were designed to shift emissions around. Practically speaking, they will delay the day when we start lowering them.

Their present purpose is simply to permit developed countries and their industries to keep emitting carbon, so long as they pay a huge financial price for it by subsidizing the developing world.

The are definitely a few issues with carbon credits, but Goldstein was right on the mark regarding one of them: purchasing these credits doesn't actually prevent more carbon dioxide from being released into the air, but simply acts like a security blanket for big, carbon-spewing countries. Rather than focusing on solutions to physically reduce emissions, these countries are permitted to buy their way out of some bad habits without having to adjust any harmful behavior. Throw in the fact that emerging economies aren't held accountable for their own emissions in any capacity and one has to wonder exactly what the purchase of carbon credits is accomplishing.

Tell us: Do you believe purchasing carbon credits to offset bad eco-habits is the right answer?

» Toronto Sun