The notion that carbon credits won’t reduce emissions, as suggested by headlines such as that below (from an article in the Wall Street Journal article*) is only serving to cloud the great job carbon credit programs do.
Yes, the impact of a tiny and mostly voluntary tax that is the same as carbon credits currently are is not likely to be a major influence on the behavior of many major emitters, especially when compared with the profits to be made from the production of fossil fuels and emitting carbon. It's more likely than not that taxing carbon emissions can have a more significant impact on reducing the dependence on fossil fuels.
The current issue with emissions is serious. However, in order to fully understand the importance of carbon credits, we have to put aside income statements, and instead examine the balance sheet. In particular, our carbon debt in the long run.
If Planet Earth were to maintain the Balance Sheet, we were required to record on our Asset column our basic needs such as physical security, food security, availability of water etc... as well as then in our long Team Debt entries the amounts of greenhouse gas as well as the extreme levels of organic carbon in soil depletion in our agricultural lands and the awe-inspiring extent of degrading the most efficient carbon storage area - the coastal mangrove forests It is evident from any analysis of that balance sheet that our present situation is not the result of one year's emissions. If the balance sheet of a business were to reflect this report, insolvency would be on the list.
This is the reason I am of the opinion that any headline that includes carbon offsets and emission reductions is misleading The issues we're seeing related to climate change aren't simply caused by carbon emissions, but a long period (centuries?) Poor agricultural practices pose a serious threat, as is rampant deforestation and mangrove loss, along with a multitude of other sins.
How severe is the damage? About half to 65% of the mangrove forests in the world are gone or have been drastically damaged. In numerous places across the globe, farms have been able to lose up to 80 percent of their organic soil carbon to the point that food security could be at risk.
This is why it is important to shift our focus away from the triple-bottom line, and instead focus on the accrued credit on the balance sheet. Carbon credits are an "balancesheet adjustment item" for this total debt. They are not simply a tax today's emissions. A (carbon) credit that could assist in the reduction of (carbon) debt.
How can we reduce this amount of debt?
It's not difficult to discover the answer. Here's an illustration. CarbonNation has an CarbonNation blue fund. It aims to preserve and restore mangroves. For mangrove forests to become scaled, significant funding is needed. In order to replant one hectare of forest, you will need between USD2,500 and USD4,500 per head. In addition to this, three years of diligent cultivation by the local community is needed.
Additionally, the local onshore fisheries must be improved with algae-based filtering methods to ensure that phosphorus and nitrogen can be eliminated from the water and that the quality of produce is improved.
As the forest maturesand the algae plants will be online, carbon credits will be created. These are used to repay the principal amount and make the investment return to investors. The community is also the primary beneficiary of the initial phase of investment. In addition to these financial benefits, what is the advantage? An increase in mangrove cover will result in a larger quantity of fish. Mangroves keep fish safe from predators. It is one of the primary sources of income for many coastal communities.
Mangroves with a greater density means better protection against coastal erosion and rising sea levels. Mangroves are 50 times more efficient at carbon sequestration than low density forests, which nearly everybody is aware of. While machines extracting carbon from the air and underground storage are futuristic looking mangroves have been doing it for millions and years and still supply our bodies with food.
The fund has already received substantial financial support and partnerships to fund its work. Any interested partners are invited to connect.
This article is well written and thoroughly researched. You can find out more The issue I have is its headline which is false and misleading. It is based upon the article's text, and could have been altered or added to by the editor.