SadaNews – A research study has found that the global carbon offset mechanism has failed to reduce the pollution causing the planet’s warming due to deep-rooted systemic issues that cannot be solved by gradual change.
The research, conducted over two decades, revealed “stubborn” problems that have rendered carbon credits in most major programs low quality, according to the study.
The study also found that the long-awaited rules agreed upon at last year’s United Nations climate summit in Baku, Azerbaijan, “did not fundamentally address the quality issue”.
Stephen Leisz, a researcher at Smith School, University of Oxford, and co-author of the study, stated, “We need to stop expecting large-scale success from carbon offsets. We’ve assessed 25 years of evidence, and almost everything up to this point has failed.”
The carbon market is a system through which countries or companies (often wealthy) buy and sell carbon credits to offset their greenhouse gas emissions.
Critics of this mechanism argue that carbon offsets are a tool for reducing emissions by giving credit to wealthy polluters to fund cheap climate action abroad while they pump the same amount of gas contributing to global warming domestically.
Experts point out that this practice might reduce levels of global warming by directing funds to where they achieve the most benefit in the shortest time, but voluntary carbon markets have long suffered from “worthless offsets” that overestimate their impact.
Researchers in the new study noted that the worst issues pertained to issuing additional credits for projects that were already underway, such as constructing a wind farm that would grow anyway, and non-permanent projects, like tree planting that later burns in wildfires.
An analytical study published in “Nature” last year showed that less than 16% of verified carbon credits indicated a real reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.
The study’s lead author, Benedict Probst, stated that the study provided a “high-level and valuable overview of the well-documented problems plaguing current carbon credit projects,” although it did not provide a critical assessment of the underlying studies.
He added that it identified some root causes of the over-crediting, such as information gaps, but warned of other systemic factors, such as the small circle advocating for high-quality projects and conflicts of interest in setting standards.
In response to recent criticisms of carbon markets, industry-led initiatives, such as the “Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market”, have undertaken the latest scientific research on the effectiveness of offset programs and have only approved programs that meet strict criteria.
Separately, what are called “rating agencies” for carbon offset programs provide buyers with information on whether these programs represent actual reductions in emissions.
The study recommends the urgent elimination of offset programs that do not effectively absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, shifting the focus of offset markets towards high-quality carbon dioxide removal and storage.
It also emphasizes that instead of funding other meaningful climate projects through carbon offset programs, they called for a contribution-based system, which does not allow donors to claim that they offset their emissions.
Source: Guardian
