This is the first article in our five-part series on forest carbon credits and the voluntary market. Read Part Two, Part Three, Part Four and Part Five later this month. At the outset of 2023, the voluntary carbon trade seemed poised to expand its reach, boosting the amount of carbon it sought to offset along with the trade’s value. Figures from 2022 suggested the market’s value had reached $2 billion, and current projections suggest it could grow to $10 billion or even $100 billion by 2030 — and into the trillions by 2050. Proponents say this voluntary mechanism had begun to mature, providing climate action as well as desperately needed funding for forest conservation in places where government protections had fallen short. It also offered, they add, an avenue for individuals, companies and states to provide restitution for their carbon emissions and contribute to holding back climate change. What’s more, that $2 billion figure was proof that it was actually happening. Then, on Jan. 18, U.K. newspaper The Guardian, German news weekly Die Zeit and nonprofit journalism outfit SourceMaterial published the first in a series of articles claiming that more than 90% of carbon credits from a set of forest conservation projects didn’t have a real impact on climate change. The benefits to the forests that were the source of the credits, as well as the value of the credits to the climate, were largely inflated, if not absent entirely, the journalists reported. Such criticism isn’t new. Similar critiques have…This article was originally published on Mongabay
The post Forest carbon credits and the voluntary market: A solution or a distraction? appeared first on EnviroLink Network.