Carbon offsetting ‘does little to help the environment’: Majority of programs significantly overestimate the amount of deforestation they prevent, study shows

Carbon offset programs need an “urgent review” because they significantly overestimate the levels of deforestation they prevent, scientists warn.

Kil research Led by the University of Cambridge, it has been argued that the ‘carbon credits’ generated by many land conservation programs are often not truthful.

This warning follows the analysis of 18 ‘REDD+ locations’ around the world that are trying to prevent tree felling as a way to combat climate change.

But calculations suggest that 60.2 million credits here in 2020 actually came from projects that made barely any deforestation cuts.

Instead, experts believe that only six percent of their total credit production is valid, suggesting that the market is vastly “exaggerated.”

“Carbon credits offer big emitters some semblance of climate credentials,” says senior author of the study, Professor Andreas Kontoleon, from Cambridge’s Department of Land Economy.

“Yet we can see that the claims of saving large tracts of forest from the chainsaw to balance emissions are exaggerated.

“These carbon credits essentially predict whether someone will cut down a tree, and sell that prediction. If you exaggerate or get it wrong, intentionally or not, you’re selling hot air.’

REDD+ projects were set up following the 2015 Paris Agreement as a way to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation in developing countries.

Carbon credits are often sold in line with the potential boom loss that would have occurred had it not been for these REDD+ schemes.

In the UK these vary between £10 and £30 per tCO2 (tons of carbon dioxide equivalent) avoided.

Amid grim climate change predictions, this market has boomed in recent years, with nearly 500 million credits traded by 2021, according to ClimateTrade.

But their effectiveness is hotly debated because companies often buy them to move to “net zero” without directly changing their unsustainable practices.

Scientists looked at 18 sites in Tanzania, Cambodia, Colombia, Peru and the Democratic Republic of Congo

To analyze the impact of this, researchers looked at the progress of 18 sites in Tanzania, Cambodia, Colombia, Peru and the Democratic Republic of Congo.

Calculations suggest that 68 percent of credits from these areas in 2020 actually came from projects that failed to sufficiently reduce deforestation.

If correct, this means that in total only six percent of the 89 million credits generated in that year were valid.

“These projects have already been used to offset almost three times more carbon than they actually reduced through forest conservation,” Professor Kontoleon continued.

‘And that while there are still more than 47 million credits available on the market.’

The reason for this “exaggerated” market is currently unclear, although experts believe that baselines “could be opportunistically inflated by freeloaders trying to maximize the volume of offsets spent by a project.”

They also recognize that political and economic conditions can affect deforestation.

“There are perverse incentives to generate huge numbers of carbon credits, and at the moment the market is essentially unregulated,” Professor Kontoleon added.

In 2020, only six percent of the CO2 credits were valid at 18 global offset locations. Pictured: deforestation in the Amazon, Colombia

Watchdog agencies are being set up, but many of those involved are also connected to carbon credit certification bodies, so they will do their own homework.

“The industry must work to close loopholes that allow actors to exploit the compensation markets in bad faith.

“It needs to develop much more sophisticated and transparent methods of quantifying the amount of protected forest to become a trusted marketplace.”

READ MORE: Climate change has a bigger impact on rainforest ecosystems than deforestation

Climate change is having a bigger impact on rainforests than deforestation, a new study of mammals in South America claims.

Researchers at the Field Museum in Chicago say that while logging is causing some local animal populations to go extinct, global warming is wiping out entire species.

The billion-dollar logging industry used to be believed to be the biggest threat to ecosystems, but researchers now say climate change is having a bigger impact.

Lead author Professor Noe de la Sancha said ‘Save the Rainforests’ is a snappy slogan but doesn’t tell the full story of how complicated it is to do just that.

He said they created a detailed measure of biodiversity by looking at the variety of species and their place in the ecosystem, rather than the total number of creatures.

Measuring traits such as ear, foot and tail size in species like Euryoryzomys russatus allows researchers to quantify functional diversity in large rainforests