That's some old math, and a video from 9 years ago linking information from 11 years ago.

 I'm not even going to bother with pointing out the incorrect portions since they won't be read or checked by anyone here.  For instance it should be blatantly obvious why you don't count only the purchased vehicle in-road-use as 100% of its carbon offset by just not driving it.

 The spirit of article is relatively sound, similar to how most recycling does nothing because of how inefficiently it is implemented.

 Most of the problem is people only look at these long-term doomsday predictions instead of focusing on solutions to today's issues.