I agree with Steve. I don't like your labels or your pricing structure. Why not just sell credits on a per lbs. basis? I think I know the answer, but as a consumer, I don't like it.

My vote is for total carbon per year, with several points per year shaved off for image (an Audi that's only driven 1000 miles per year still looks like an Audi, sorry).

I want a terrapass for being a vegetarian. Perhaps I should start my own green company that does a similar thing for people who don't eat meat. Vegans get the super special sticker. Vegetarians get the next highest sticker. Sustainable farm raised meat purchasers get... You get the idea.

I think you should offer the current styles AND an alternative for people who would prefer.

My wife and I drive one car, a Saturn LW-200 wagon, 7500 miles a year, which puts us below "Hybrid" as well. And I hadn't thought about the oddity of putting a "hybrid" terrapass on the window of an obviously non-hybrid car.

So here's what you do: Sell Terrapasses in 1000 lb increments also, and let people choose which kind they prefer. That way, even if someone can't afford to pony up for their entire CO2 output, they can get, e.g., a 1000 lb Terrapass and put it on their car window, alerting people that they have REDUCED their CO2 impact, even if they haven't offset it entirely. (Conversely, people who don't drive at all should be able to buy a Terrapass bike sticker for so many 1000 lbs of carbon to offset their airplane trips.)

Also, the t-shirts (which should be from organic cotton) could be the Terrapass -- that is, I should be able to buy a Terrapass and get a t-shirt that says "10,000 lbs CO2" (or 11k, or whatever), even if I don't own a car.

I like the suggestion by JMG. Those of us who use other forms of transportation (bike, bus, rail) as our primary mode could factor in the CO2 impacts as well to get a more "accurate" estimate. Individuals then have the choice of purchasing passes that offset some, all, or (for those of us who want to do more) CO2 impacts of others.

I think your naming convention is fine. The total impact is fuel economy and miles driven. The whole 'image' concern is overblown - the Terrapass concept raises general awareness in a great way, and only the cognoscenti will concern themselves with gradations in pass level.

I bought one of these things (actually I asked for it for Christmas) so that I can drive what I want and have what is effectively a zero-emissions vehicle. Isn't that the point?

You guys need to do two things:

1) Send Steve an apology; when I read about the program it sounded like the deal was you wouldn't have to change your car to make it environmentally friendlier, so if Steve is paying the right membership level then you sold him on the program, then turned around and scolded him on his car.
2) Make ALL the stickers say "zero emissions vehicle" or something like that, since that's supposed to be the effect.

I can't believe you gave Steve a hard time about his car. Jerks.

I don't agree at all with the comment about terrapasses for vegans. Whether it's a plant or an animal is only one factor, and it's not the largest. That rice on your plate traveled halfway around the world to get there, and it didn't do it on biofuels. The most climate-friendly diet is the one you can grow in your own back yard, whatever that happens to be. The next step up is whatever you can buy from local organic farms. If you can't get local organic dry beans, you're better off buying local pastured chickens (who convert inedible carbon-neutral grass to protein with about 1/3 the calorie content, and fertilize the field in the process) than beans that cost half a gallon of gas to can and travelled an average of 1500 miles to get to your plate. (see http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/features/feature_template.cfm?ID=1275 for a lightweight intro to this topic)

Marty,
No kidding. But saying I'm completely wrong is going overboard. I appreciate the qualifications you added to my post though.

I looked at the link you provided and read the material. My question is: Did you read it?

"Eating high on the food chain is even worse. Eating a carrot or an apple gives the diner all the caloric energy in those foods, but feeding these foods to a pig reduces the energy available by a factor of 10. That's because the pig uses most of the energy just staying alive, and stores only a fraction of the energy in the parts we eat. All told, it takes 68 calories of fossil fuel to produce one calorie of pork, and 35 calories of fuel to make one calorie of beef."
[snip]
"First, eat lower on the food chain. That means more fruits and vegetables, and fewer meats and fish. Meats, poultry and fish contain necessary proteins, but most American diets contain too much protein - about twice the recommended amount. Since 80% of the grains go to feeding livestock, the amount of energy used indirectly to support our diet of double bacon cheeseburgers is staggering. And, if you do eat meat, then try to avoid animals grown in feedlots or factory pens. They take far more energy calories to raise than free-range, grassfed critters, which have only about a third of the embedded energy."

Can someone post a reputable source for these calories of fossil fuel per calorie of meat figures? I mean, whats considered waste? is the cow dung thats later used to grow other crops considered? or any other similar considerations? I mean, i go catch a fish in the lake with my own pole and Im using more fossil fuel than buying carrots or apples at the store? (same distance driven).

Enough about all this animal talk. The terrapass reduces just CO2 from your emissions. But aren't there a lot of other considerations one should make when driving a car? How about the other kinds of emissions the car releases that have negative health consequences or otherwise pollute? Could you find ways to reduce these pollutants or setup a fund that donates money to institutions that treat the health calamaties that result from breathing in polluted air? What about offsetting the energy it took to extract the oil from the ground, ship it to the US, turn it into gasoline and deliver it to gas stations? That process has got to pollute a lot itself. I drive a hybrid civic and bought a $30 pass... but I'd be more than willing to give more if I could reduce any of these other things. Also what about a home Terrapass for your heating, air conditioning, electricity, etc.?

Hey, I'm a bike commuter - do I get a free TerraPass? ;-)

Seriously, your site is a pretty good idea, but I would love to see you devote part of your site to encouraging people to just use less or use alternatives such as bikes. Like anything else (including car driving), biking as transportation takes some attitude adjustment and a small(!) amount of specialized gear (warm clothing if you are in a cold climate, trailer for hauling groceries, etc.), but it's amazing what you can get used to. And not only are you reducing your environmental footprint, but you are saving a lot of money in insurance, registration, and maintenance, not just gas! So how about encouraging more lifestyle change!

Locally grown produce will almost always beat locally grown animals or animal products in terms of efficiency and minimal environmental impact.

There might be some exceptions for insects and I don't begrudge anyone who wishes to eat insects but I'd rather not.

Aside from eating insects, I don't see any environmental or health justification for eating animals or animal products. People do it out of habit and taste and they make excuses for continuing to do it.

I will agree there is little impact to eating a raw fish found in a local stream. But such a fish is probably contaminated with fat-soluble toxics that bioaccumulate with successive trophic levels in the food chain and probably is best avoided for that reason alone. Also consider this: is it something that 6.5 billion people on the planet can do? Is it something you want them to do?

A lot of meatarians try to come up with some weird exceptions about the lower impact of plant-based diets.

Not all vegans are eating highly processed plant foods from the other side of the planet. Some of us are getting almost all of our kcals locally. Not all, however. I admit that my flax is from Canada and most of my nuts and olive oil are from California.

Transport costs are not a significant part of total energy required for ground transport of high fat foods. They can be very significant, however, for the watery high weight low kcal produce items such as lettuce and tomatoes. But since such many produce foods are typically eaten raw (or should be eaten raw) one must also consider that it doesn't require energy to cook them.

Raw local seasonal veganism is the very best. The more, the better!