THE GOVERNMENT doesn't require it and there are no industry standards, but a variety of Washington businesses are working and spending money for the cause: fighting global warming. Some volunteer to pay thousands of dollars for carbon offsets. Some up their recycling, pay for energy-efficient renovations or take other local action against a global phenomenon.

Linda VerNooy's business is helping and encouraging these people. She's the executive director of NetGreen, a Seattle-based nonprofit that consults with smaller companies to calculate the business's emissions of gases that cause global warming, and work to reduce or offset them.

Most of the companies want to project a public image of caring about the environment, she says.

"There are certainly some executives that see it as the right thing, but it certainly makes business sense," VerNooy says.

The main reason: a growing group of consumers that want products and services that lower greenhouse gas emissions.

Sandra Archibald, dean and professor at the Daniel J. Evans School of Public Affairs at the University of Washington, says these consumers have driven up sales of hybrid cars and contributed to a boom in investment in alternative energy.

"People who have the willingness to pay for CO2 reduction should become a growing force in the market," Archibald says.

One strategy for fighting global warming is conservation: using energy-saving measures, increasing recycling and curtailing car and air travel. This can save companies money, particularly in an era of high fuel prices.

Companies also have the option of buying offsets. That is, they send money to a project elsewhere that will save greenhouse gases. Popular projects include wind energy, methane collection from landfills and reforestation.

Often, offsets are the cheapest and easiest way to reduce a company's impact. The trouble is, there are no industry standards, and it can be hard to tell if the money leads to less carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Also, the money could go toward projects that would have happened even without the offset money. For example, tax breaks and high energy prices are already encouraging the development of wind energy. With more than a dozen companies, both nonprofits such as the Climate Trust and for-profit companies such as TerraPass, acting as brokers for offsets in the U.S. alone, consumers should know what their money is accomplishing.

Some environmentalists argue that the availability of offsets makes companies less likely to take conservation measures. Instead of opting for the tangible conservation benefit of, say, giving up a car, people are more likely to pay $54 to someone they trust to conserve for them. And if the offset projects are low-quality, then the money doesn't do much to help the planet.

"There are always issues around quality control in emerging industries," Archibald says.

 Evaluating offset projects is a big part of VerNooy's job. This year, NetGreen changed the offsets it offers to align with the World Wildlife Fund's voluntary Gold Standard.

Once consumers are sure of the industry's standards, then offsets should be a powerful way of reducing emissions, she says.

"From a theoretical viewpoint, it should work extremely well."

CASE STUDY #1:

The Carbon- Neutral Car Dealership

As president of Rodland Toyota in Everett, Buzz Rodland has watched customer demand grow for lower emissions. The Toyota Prius is his best-selling model. At the beginning of 2007, the waiting list for the cars was a year long. Toyota started shipping more, and now the dealership sells between 25 and 30 a month. Hybrid vehicles make up a quarter of Rodland Toyota's sales. The customers who buy them have a passion for the cars.