Why carbon offsets are worse than you think

Abone ol 459 B

görünümler 311 B

99% 7 900 1

Carbon offsets sound so promising: If you emit some CO2, you can just pay someone else to reduce that amount somewhere else, and you’re good! But is it too good to be true?
We're destroying our environment at an alarming rate. But it doesn't need to be this way. Our new channel Planet A explores the shift towards an eco-friendly world - and challenges our ideas about what dealing with climate change means. We look at the big and the small: What we can do and how the system needs to change. Every Friday we'll take a truly global look at how to get us out of this mess.
#PlanetA #CarbonOffset #CarbonOffsetting
Reporter: Kiyo Dörrer
Camera: Henning Goll
Video Editor: David Jacobi
Supervising Editor: Joanna Gottschalk
Read More:
Carbon Offset Guide by the Stockholm Environment Institute:
www.offsetguide.org/
Study on the effectivity of mandatory carbon offsets:
ec.europa.eu/clima/system/fil...
Market Report on voluntary carbon markets:
www.ecosystemmarketplace.com/...
Study on the effectivity of carbon offsets among Indian wind power projects:
www.cesifo.org/en/publikation...
Investigation on Cambodian rain forest conservation:
features.propublica.org/brazi...
Special thanks to: Lambert Schneider, Raphael Calel and Grant Rosoman for background interviews.
0:00 Intro
1:05 What are carbon offsets?
2:10 Carbon offsets in action
5:58 Scale and scope of offsets
6:55 Problems with carbon offsets
8:19 Additionality of offsets
10:24 Leakage and double counting
13:39 Solutions

katma

5 Haz 2023

Paylaş:

Herunterladen:

Yük bağlantısı.....

Ekle:

Çalma listem

Daha sonra izle

YORUMLAR : 871

DW Planet A Yıl önce

Have you ever bought a carbon offset - or if not, would you buy one now?

Meerkat Hero Yıl önce

Nope, always considered it to be green washing.

Save Money Save the Planet Yıl önce

While I support many of the projects that fall under the category (like tree planting and remaking wetlands), I just don’t see the point in citizens financing it. Take the money from my taxes I say. Also, I worry about people getting such a good feeling from buying offsets so that they don’t make any of the necessary changes in their life in order to reduce emissions.

Pq Yıl önce

I see offsets as an absolute must. Not purchasing offsets is denying our responsibility for our emissions past and present. The CO2 stock we have emitted is just not going to disappear anytime soon. None of these issues are unique to carbon offsets: just speak to any accountant. If we are serious and honest about tackling climate change, then we must find a way to make offsets work while holding each other accountable for actually reducing emissions past, present and future.

Green Hippie Yıl önce

I think the focus should be on efforts to make carbon offsets legit instead of buying them vs not buying them. I agree that carbon offsets are relied upon too heavily and that they aren't even always actually offsetting carbon, but what about the carbon offset programs that actually are making a positive difference? The re-claimed wetlands that you visited are a good example. We need to put money toward these types of carbon reducing projects that require money but aren't money makers. The truth is, money motivates people even more than the threat of impending doom.

KUPO-Kutak-Poly Live Hindi Yıl önce

I don't recall buying a carbon offset and to be honest I will be skeptical of buying one.

Sorsetti Gommosi Yıl önce

I've used to buy them a few years ago, but then I thought that my money would only make the company that is offsetting look better (like when big corporations ask for your change for charity). If I want to offset carbon emissions I do it by directly funding these projects, not through a multibillion company.

ZsX 7 Yıl önce

There are already publiciy traded companies which only focus on the developing and maintaining of natural projects which offset carbon credits which are sold to big companies. Just do your research.

amicloud Yıl önce

preach! NEVER donate to a for-profit business! It's a racket.

Alex Barčovský Yıl önce

Right? If I had a business, I would include the offset into the price of the product, if I truly cared about it.

Alejandro Palacios 6 aylar önce

Am I the only one that feels that big businesses are trying to transfer their responsibility to their costumers? I feel they justify their production on our needs but they are earning money too. Of course maybe the entire world hasn´t been able to find a solution for a clean production yet, but as long as I see this problem they are not doing as a favor when they give us things.

Zoe & Zac in a kayak Yıl önce

In a part of Australia that I grew up in, they bulldozed thousands of hectares of forest and healthy bush to plant monoculture tree forests for "carbon credits" back in early 2000's. I've never seen carbon offsets as a positive thing after this

Nathan Yıl önce

Wow, whereabouts is this?

Aranimda Yıl önce

Interesting story. What is the location of this? Any sources?

Beau B Yıl önce

That's awful

Drew Jensen Yıl önce

Not to mention the majority of the blockchain used to track and record the offsetting is also a major polluter.

dan theman Yıl önce

@Nathan Probably near brisbane. Every time i drive into bris you see the countryside full of the same trees perfectly placed apart all looking the same for kilometers. Looks like a forest grew up amongst arid bushlands.

Sumita Singha Yıl önce

Kiyo Dorrer is a great presenter who can talk about such complex subjects and make them totally understandable

Kynshra Yıl önce

Agreed, but in the end shes just telling a script that everyone could have told.

James Francese 9 aylar önce

@Kynshra She’s a writer on her own segments

Gerg C Yıl önce

It should be noted that nature-based offsetting methods, like tree planting and peat bog re-wetting etc often take yeeeaaars to start actually offsetting any significant amount of carbon (trees need to grow, peat bog has an incredibly slow metabolism), then once they do start offsetting, they need to pay off the carbon debt from planting them first, THEN they can actually start working on the emissions created by a corporation or whatever. But by that time, it could be decades in the future and we don't have that timescale to fight the climate crisis. The reason corporations are jumping on offsetting is because it's cheap and they don't have to change their behaviour. It's not because it's a truly effective way of solving climate change.

Bearded Bastard Yıl önce

" we don't have that timescale to fight the climate crisis." this is where you lose normal people. this doom and gloom kills engagement. Stop it.

Felix Haag Yıl önce

Well, when do you want to tell those normal people that going everywhere by car my get more expensive, that heating and water will get more expensive? There are huge limitations on what is achievable on a voluntary "I do not want to loose any of my current lifestyle perks"-basis. If you want to seriously battle climate change, things must happen, and they will not be funny for a lot of people. That is the truth, and it seems many people simply do not really care about it.

Cait Yıl önce

sorry but you can’t just “no bad vibes” a climate crisis - it’s happening whether you’re comfortable with the reality of it or not. the scientific consensus has given us a window to act, and many of these green offset strategies aren’t doing enough within that window to be helpful. of course strategies such as rewilding, watershed restoration, reforestation should still be taking place, but all of that should be happening in addition to concrete efforts to reduce carbon output at the point of origin.

Remix Yıl önce

I donate £10 a month to a small very well research ethical rewilding company. I’ll continue to do so for my entire life and I’ll probably put in 15% of my income to climate change in the future. I’ve also registered interested in many climate volunteering projects. I’ve also alleviated many things in my life that were carbon intensive. I live very low carbon and I still have a great life and I’m able to do the things I want to do. If everyone done this sort of thing it would have a great impact. The middle class especially have the maneuverability in their lives to do so.

Remix Yıl önce

manjoumesan Hi, I donate to a small company called mossy earth. They’re great, they send you the exact GPS coordinates of your trees planted every month and send you updates and a personalised video.

Brendan O'Neill Yıl önce

I looked into buying carbon offsets years ago, but the low price left me suspicious. Recently I've studied sustainability and found myself deeply suspicious of most corporate activities in this realm: the big emitters are the ones writing the rules about how we should count carbon and decarbonise. Otherwise, why would it be so complicated? Complicated is hard to solve. It's time to change who writes the rules of the conversation.

Just Rupes Yıl önce

Thank you for this, it has confirmed what I had long suspected. I use to buy carbon credits for my small one man IT business. It was once I had looked into carbon credits I decided the best solution was simply to look at investing the money into more efficient systems and reducing our carbon foot print by producing less power hungry solutions, shutting down systems that were not in use. Also I have started promoting reusing old equipment instead of buying low budget systems to prevent systems going into landfill for as long as possible. We have some computer systems still in use 12 years down the road and still being productive. We also upgrade just what we need to upgrade, so if someone wants a new system but have an old one, we often reuse as much as possible to make that happen. So much IT equipment just gets binned after 3 years it's ridiculous. Simple upgrades can keep that system out of landfill for at least twice that time, often three to four times the projected life span. Just because something is old does not mean it's useless. This is also why the right to repair projects are so important.

John Bash-on-ger Aylar önce

Considering computer equipment and processors don't age any more as those did in the nineties, updating the rules for replacing might be a good idea. Maybe add some upgrade path rules. Maybe add some replacement requirements: the new system must have significantly higher performance or better energy efficiency or both.

Bill Bleisch Yıl önce

A good job of presenting a complex topic. One update: with the agreement on Article 16 at Glasgow, it is now possible to avoid double counting by buying only "authorized" carbon offsets. These are subtracted from a country's Nationally Determined Commitments, so there ahould be no double counting. Also, regarding permanence, forests may be damaged by fires, but they do grow back. The permanence of forest offests relies on commitments to good forest management. Of course that can be reversed. But is "keep-it-in-the-ground" any more permanent? It only takes one Trump to reverse those commitments, and then the carbon will not return underground by itself.

Jiří Zárevúcky Yıl önce

The question then is, how is the carbon offset made by reforestation counted? My impression from various marketing campaigns is they basically promise to plant a given number of trees for your contribution. They never say anything about caring for those trees until they are fully grown and making sure they don't just die and rot.

Bill Bleisch Yıl önce

@Jiří Zárevúcky If you see a project like that offered, avoid it! Certified projects can now use a combination of on-the-ground surveys and satellite image analysis to verify the carbon storage.

nicksurfs1 Yıl önce

How do we know if they’ve been authorized? We know there will be many imitations so if I’m theory I wanted to buy a carbon offset what do I need to look for to make sure it’s authentically the kind you are talking about? Are they only sold in or via Scotland? Just trying to clarify.

Adrian Thoroughgood 10 aylar önce

@nicksurfs1 not related to Scotland. That was just where COP 26 was held.

PersonXes Yıl önce

Great video. One very important distinction which you didn't really cover is the distinction between carbon removal projects and carbon emissions mitigation projects. Most (especially the cheap) projects are about avoiding emissions. It will invest cleaner cooking facilities in African homes that emit less, or will install solar panels that emits less than the diesel generator etc. The problem is that this can't be sustained. In 2050 the whole world HAS to be climate neutral and in order to achieve that you can't pay others to reduce their emissions so that you can continue to emit carbon. Once the others hit zero emissions your emissions continue to contribute to global warming. Carbon removal projects that actively extract emissions from the air (like planting trees) are therefore the future (with many caveats as pointed out in your video)

Mark Walker 4 aylar önce

But there is not enough unused/underutilised deforested landmass available for all the required replanting for existing offset requirements let alone future needs. Geosequestration might end up being one of the main options

Go Green Post Yıl önce

As someone who has worked on creating carbon offset standards and accounting methodologies, a few things that come to mind. First, the content here is well informed and explained. Second, we have to keep in mind that carbon offsets are not the problem, it's the guidelines put in place that allow projects to become carbon offset projects that are the problem. In the video there is mention of 85% of projects under global standards not actually offsetting carbon. These standards have since been removed for this reason. This all brings me to my last thought, which is, if you are careful and purchase carbon offsets from projects that have gone through proper evaluation, they are an amazing tool to immediately stop atmospheric carbon emissions from getting any higher. Its then up to us to lower our emissions at the same time.

El Tercero Yıl önce

I just cant wait till we can capture the emissions. Like the smoke stacks or catalytic converters. Think of chimneys with carbon captures, a carbon abortion system for airplane, and other emission recaptures. The sequestration would be great. Like planting not only trees but also coral to reestablish the reefs.

lcg3092 Yıl önce

carbon offsets can very well be a problem, specially if they are not effective, where they encourage companies to not actually reduce emissions and just pay to pretend they are doing it, and we end up not actually doing anything.

Go Green Post Yıl önce

@lcg3092 yes! That’s exactly my point. Carbon offset programs are only as effective as the standard they are built on. Strong standards means environmental integrity while weak standards likely means greed.

Mariana Mackinney Yıl önce

Wow! This is a very insightful coment. I would love to ask you a question if it Is ok. Do you know of any academic paper that talks about the carbon secuestration of well implemented Miyawaki forests? Do they meet carbon offset standards? Are they "accepted" as valid projects under the Clean Development Mecanism under the Paris Agreement?

samueldullaart Yıl önce

Hey I'd like to offset my carbon emmissions but I find it hard to find a proper carbon offset project that I can fully trust. Do you have tips for such projects and where/how to find them? Also I was thinking that what we really need is a label for carbon offset projects, given by an independent non-profit, to help consumers make informed decisions.

extremelymad Yıl önce

I have never researched this topic properly, but thanks to your video it's got more clear. Probably I'll consider offsetting my GHG emissions if particular program is verifiable and looks trustworthy.

andy the gardener Yıl önce

'why not' as the easyjet advert says. if it makes you feel better about that holiday. you need to get away. its been a terrible year

Wattsy Yıl önce

Buy carbon offsets through national projects and not through international projects if you’re worried about their validity. Other then that this video is just typical lazy journalism from another person who lives in a big city and knows nothing beyond the concrete jungle.

Climate Change doesn't bargain Yıl önce

@Wattsy why would national projects be valid?

Sun Yat-sen Yıl önce

@Wattsy why?

Jiří Zárevúcky Yıl önce

I think individual carbon offsetting (by consumers and companies) is actively harmful. It makes people feel like they are doing something to reduce their impact, which makes them less motivated to do the thing we actually need and change their lifestyle. It provides an easy cop-out for high emission companies, since they can just charge customers for their "climate action" without doing anything about their emissions.

Jonsey Yıl önce

I hear you, however you make reduction sound too easy. Just "changing your lifestyle" will not get you to zero emissions, quite the opposite actually. A huge part of your carbon footprint - called the carbon floor - can't be avoided as long as you life in carbonized society. You still need to heat your home during winter, eat fruits and vegetables and you also share responsibility in public emissions of your country, like hospitals, national defense or highways. So I disagree that offsets are only harmful. Following that logic a garbage company is harmful, too - even though it's disposing of the trash we can't avoid. In my opinion we need to stop throwing our unavoidable carbon on the streets and instead pay an offsetting provider to dispose of the emissions we can't avoid - all while meanwhile reducing and taking political action of course.

Jiří Zárevúcky Yıl önce

The issue is that some companies pay massive amounts of money for marketing campaigns trying to convince people those offsets are enough to make their emissions a non-issue. When I say changing lifestyle, I don't just mean on the individual level. Many things about our society need to change to have a chance at solving the issue. Only people really hate when someone tells them they need to change, and that goes for individuals as well as company leaders. So long as most people treat it as someone else's problem, the situation isn't going to improve, and the offset industry is enabling the perception that the problem is being dealt with, when in reality no realistic amount of offsets can ever put a dent in the amount of co2 in the atmosphere. As a concept it doesn't scale. And then there's that thing where Germany decided to shut down working nuclear power plants when a huge chunk of their energy mix is coal, because... hur dur nuclear worse than literally destroying the planet, I guess.

Jonathan Irons Yıl önce

Why can't you do both?

l_ife efi_l Yıl önce

Real purpose is to present to the world that they r doing smth to reduce the dmg that they r doing. In reality, how effective r these measures is anyone guess and its nvr the aim of these companies to invest in offsetting, bcoz if they do they would have been forthcoming on the effects of their fracking activities have on the environment, in particular climate change, 30 yrs ago. Yes, shell had known of the climate change and sea level rise back in the 80s. Thats why they built their oil rig few meters higher for it in the Antarctica

Eero Järviluoma Yıl önce

I think a question that should be asked when offsetting carbon is this: For how long is the carbon going to remain offset? Who can guarantee that this swamp project for example will remain in this state for 100 years or 500 years? Wont the man made dams trapping the water eventually erode away? Considering all sorts of natural and human made changes like forest fires, erosion, world wars, etc. I have hard time believing that almost any of these compensation projects successfully keep the carbon stored for extended timeframes (hundreds of years), unless it's literally pumped back to Earths crust where it came from. I get the feeling we are just kicking the can forward with these compensation projects. I'd spend my money elsewhere.

regie egseg Yıl önce

Kicking a can is the goal until we invent something better

Anders Berg Yıl önce

well in the moor case, it's helping restoring something to a state which nature can sustain on its own, so done right it should be stable. But of course land use could change, and that's more of a problem - how to ensure it stays a moor? There could be investments in it, where it has a non-profit ownership funded by the offsets and maybe other ways of funding? I don't know in this case, but being able to make money out of an co2-sinking-asset seems like a great idea. I.e. paranuts, which are collected in the rainforest, giving the local people an incentive to keep it instead of burning and cultivating. In Germany I think the situation is quite different, with laws and control surrounding these moors. Not entirely safe, but less likely that someone just pays a politician and then starts to cultivate that land.

Calvin Tran Yıl önce

This concept is called permanence. The standard set by Verra, the carbon third party verifying body, has 100 years as the duration. They have a Buffer Pool of credits stored over time as well to serve as an insurance vehicle. This helps with permanence

Devin Elgert Yıl önce

Carbon offsets: the modern version of medieval indulgences.

marklimbrick Yıl önce

Excellent analogy should print your own t-shirts over previous logos upcycled.

SharpBucks J Yıl önce

@marklimbrick I was thinking about doing that

Koos Looijesteijn Yıl önce

That comparison is made a lot. I think it's cynical and wrong. Indulgences didn't actually go to the people wronged by the sinner. But the video does show that if you're careful with how you choose your offsets, it can be effective.

Stieli musterman Yıl önce

Koos Looijesteijn Privileged hypocrites do it in order to feel better about their lavish consumer behavior, so there are definitely parallels...

Raam Yıl önce

terrible analogy

Jack Warren Yıl önce

It's a real shame that noone from Gold or Verra was interviewed for this. They would have provided much detail on the methodologies used to measure carbon offset, and also the mitigations set in place to insure against forest fires, corruption, damage, etc. They may have provided a more clear explanation in how these public registries avoid double counting. Essentially every tonne recognised by these standards is logged. When they get retired/discontinued, they cannot be discontinued against a second emitter's emissions. All public domain and a powerful tool since the wild west days of early carbon offsetting. Absolutely though, reduce first. There frankly isn't enough offset projects around to mitigate everything, and they often take years to go live!

benjamin ng Yıl önce

Agreed. I actually read through their procedures and requirements. Granted they arent watertight, however there are checks and balance systems in place to safeguard. I believe in future, it can be finetuned. Because we have to be realistic that not all sorts of manufacturing or industries can reach 100% 0 emission. Eventually someform of offset is still required to synergize & complement the emission reduction goal.

Ana Calderon 8 aylar önce

There are other registries besides VERRA and GoldStandard. Conservation, forestation, reforestation, upkeep and mitigation procedures and protocols are introduced, followed by participants aggregated to these projects and closely monitored by the project developers. Once a credit is registered you are able to follow the project from inception to the final disposition of the credit (retired, sold, transferred, etc.) There is more to this than meets the eye. The optimal scenario is to reduce our emissions, in the meantime these projects work and offer real life changing conditions and endless possibilities for communities who partner up with the project developers.

Jasmine 6 aylar önce

I wondered about this! I was even thinking of stopping my gold-standard carbon offset because the video implied all of them are a scam

Joe Yıl önce

For double-counting: You could count all offsets twice deliberately: a given project (say 100,000 tons once completed) would award a geographic 100k carbon offset based on the country it's physically located in, and 100k capital carbon offset based which country/nation paid for it. If geo and capital carbon offsets are quoted, everyone would know you'd need to divide by two to arrive at the TRUE carbon offset. So Nicaragua would get 100k geo offset, Germany would get 100k capital offset, and both would get a true carbon offset of 50k each. The peet marsh project on the otherhand would award 100k geo and 100k capital offsets to Germany, adding to 200k. The true offset works out to 100k, exactly what you'd expect for a fully domestic offset project.

Raoul Luijten Yıl önce

Actually doing this for my company but in reverse, I will suggest to offset the double amount, and do half globally and half locally.

pani thera 9 aylar önce

@Raoul Luijten I doubt they will allow you to do that. If so, wouldn't they lessen their profit?

Raoul Luijten 9 aylar önce

@pani thera Sure but these numbers are not in the order of magnitude of the profits so its a relatively small investment, and you want to avoid people claiming greenwashing, so that way you have a built in safety mechanism with regards to the flimsiness of how accurate carbonsequestration works, we don´t really have the available data and investigations to prove exactly how much carbon is being stored and will remain stored so some redundancy I think is in place.

Joe Coroneo - Seaman Yıl önce

Just discovered this channel, really great videos - clear, informative and well produced (and well researched). Thanks so much and keep it up!

Oliver Ullman Yıl önce

This is an amazing documentary. I use carbon offsets, and feel more reluctant to use them, and that when I use them I now know which types of projects to donate to

Adrian Thoroughgood 10 aylar önce

I think projects that provide green electricity to remote communities are very worthwhile. You are improving people's lives as well as reducing emissions.

Sarah Yıl önce

Brilliant video. It's sad how everything is been reduced to a bottom line.

Sudashon Naidoo Yıl önce

I would buy a carbon credit. I have had concerns so I decided to do something about it. I have developed a few grid tied utility scale renewable energy projects . I am now creating greenfield carbon offset projects . Happy for you guys to monitor the development process.

Taurus Yıl önce

The voluntary carbon offsets might have to be implemented and monitored by nation states. They can reclaim an area for this purpose only, and for example keep the forests from being cut down through generations.

Kevin Baker Yıl önce

There's plenty of reason for deceptive practices to be condoned at a nation-state level. You need regulation, or at least auditing, by an international independent organization.

Lei-Lani Terrell Yıl önce

I still support offsetting. However it's good to understand the base pricing. Your video has provided a list of good questions to asks.

Danny Harvey Yıl önce

Two additional considerations: reforestation projects also reduce the land surface albedo, thereby increasing the absorption of solar radiation, which has a warming effect. This effect likely exceeds the cooling effect of reducing CO2 concentration for reforestation in mid to high latitudes. So, even if reforestation there is offsetting the effect of emissions on atmospheric CO2 concentration, it is not offsetting the effect on climate (there would be a net warming effect). In low latitudes, reforestation has a net cooling effect, but not as large as would be expected from the absorption of CO2 alone. Further complicating the picture are likely effects of reforestation on cloudiness (at least in some regions). Concerning the peatland offset project, the rewetting of the drained peatland will create some methane emissions that will cancel some of the benefit of the CO2 absorption. This does not seem to have been considered.

Peter Yıl önce

1. That really depends on the color of the terrain that is reforested. If it was green anyway, not much changes in the absorption spectrum.

benjamin ng Yıl önce

My understanding is that when agencies like verra and gold standard vet and quantify a project, they will consider such factors, eg amt of C02 reduced - amt of Methane produced. Same for renewable engery project, eg solar farm, they will net off the amt of carbon produced from the manufacturing of the PV cells. So do ensure projects you are gg to pay is listed on such reputable registries, to better safeguard against dodgy projects.

Adrian Thoroughgood 10 aylar önce

It was my understanding that the water suppresses the reactions that causes methane to be released.

BattMarn Yıl önce

this basically confirmed what i thought. I never offset my carbon through the polluters' websites, I will do it myself by funding specific projects

MindinViolet Yıl önce

What a fantastic overview of the the subject! I went into this knowing very little and now I feel informed.

DW Planet A Yıl önce

Our next video comes out tomorrow. Stay tuned and hit that subscribe button!

xchopp Yıl önce

Hats off to DW for providing English subtitles: thank you!

Houri Ng Yıl önce

Very interesting video. I have a question: is there a regulation, a visit or a report for the offset carbon? I mean it's an obligation for big companies to have reduce their footprint, but does COP26 or the Paris agreement also put a head, a team, an audit or examiners to check it regularly, like every year (and to avoid CO2 emission, they can use local examiners).

Bill Bleisch Yıl önce

Yes, there is an audit for the Paris agreement, but only if it is authorized as part of a naionally determined commitment (NDC).

Houri Ng Yıl önce

@Bill Bleisch thanks for the reply. so it means it is rather words than action. So I wonder if people by CO2 offsets where the money goes? if it dosent go for the project?

Zee Yin Yıl önce

The most important thing to understand about trees: they absorb CO2 which becomes part of the wood, then when they die and decay, the exact same amount of CO2 is release back to atmosphere, down to every single C atom.

urbaniv Yıl önce

Thank you. Finally a good explanation for my gut feeling U had for years. It just doesn't make sense to think that we can reduce something without changing our lifestyle. No we can't buy our way out.

Jasmine 6 aylar önce

Sadly this video makes it seem like all offsets are a scam, when some are legit. No matter our lifestyle, we will still produce some emissions so I think voluntary offsets should be advocated (if the right projects are used)

Gloria Jane Edmund Yıl önce

I probably won't buy them unless I come across a good, verified project. As mentioned, mitigation and awareness of greenwashing is key. :)

Rumo Yıl önce

I looked into this some years ago. Mostly I got to the same conclusion. But it’s very different depending on where you invest. Of course non-profits are preferable. Integrated services (airline websites etc) reliably calculate with 1/2 the emissions others calculate for the same flights. Look into projects that help in addition to CO2-Offset. I recommend Atmosfair.

Fran F 6 aylar önce

Some emissions are just very difficult to abate at the moment. For example those related to agriculture or air travel. There were no good trains for my upcoming vacation while the plane was cheap and convenient. On the website there were several offset options for different prices. In the end I chose one with a share of biofuel directly reducing the airplane emissions. The price per t of CO2 was considerably higher than the EU ETS cost of carbon.

aoshifo Yıl önce

Yes, I have bought and will buy more carbon offsets. I spread it across certified projects to increase the probability of real effect. My next goal is to offset more than I produce, because net zero is not good enough!

Nicholas Connolly Yıl önce

Carbon offsets projects are a really good thing mainly because no matter how much carbon you reduce we still need carbon

Karol S Yıl önce

It is always a good ideal to hire the same company in rescuing our world who are activly destroying it.

Techcafe Yıl önce

carbon offsets seem like an elaborate way for polluters to keep on polluting whilst gaming the system and pretending to care about the planet.

F C Yıl önce

It's for meeting quotas. It's not really enforceable

Alexander Wall 3 aylar önce

No I don’t think I would. I am hoping to be looking at this or a similar topic in my masters thesis of whether the offsets should be paid by consumer or company. Very interesting topic for the travel industry!!

Marlon Kögl Yıl önce

Richtig guter Bericht! Toll, dass es auch einen deutschen Kanal gibt, der so wichtige Recherchen macht!

Rd S 18 gün önce

Great video. I got all the points except the double counting issue. How is it double counted if the same airline buys the credit from the German peatland and also from the Nicaragua forest? The airline company then has 2 different sources of credits, has two different carbon papers, which are independent from each other. So I don't get the double counting issue here.

Noukz Yıl önce

Another amazing video on a very important topic! Also, ❤ Kiyo!

muthukumaranl Yıl önce

Another brilliant piece on this complex subject!

Hrushikesh Avachat 3 aylar önce

For the last few years, some of my friends are saying we need to compare the carbon emissions of every company and allow them to sell the carbon offset if they emit less than what they were allowed to at first. To be more effective, only operational activities can be considered (Afforestation by company won't be consodered). This means only those companies who intend to reduce carbon emissions, get the benefit of carbon emissions.

K A Yıl önce

What about using the offset Benjamins to transition households to green power? I would definitely buy the offset on many items if in return i would get a photovoltaic install.

Ramanuj Lal Yıl önce

I think most people are pretty sure that this whole offset thing is a huge corporate sham by multibillion companies to escape their responsibility. There’s is zero accountability, and nobody is willing to look under the covers in fear of what they might discover.

Fei Li Yıl önce

For everyone on here who has bought carbon offsets in the past, who were you buying for (yourself, family, business) and what motivated you to do it? Did you find value in the purchase?

Jasmine 6 aylar önce

I buy it from a startup called GoClimate. They fund Gold Standard projects and they use renewables instead of tree planting As for value, this video implied (through a very short statement) that renewables would’ve have been built anyway so my offset would be useless. But I’d like to disagree because most of their projects are in developing countries, where renewables really need help because government policies are still siding with conventional energy

Raychelle Injete Yıl önce

Yes I would buy a carbon offset because it's better than doing nothing at all. The reality is that people still need to travel so it's impossible to completely shut down the world. I think the main issue here is governance. Since the projects lack integrity that doesn't mean the initiative is bad. I believe this is the best we can do in today's circumstances/context.

Zyanya O'Neill Yıl önce

Thanks for the education and the insight, DW! These issues are more nuanced and complicated than yelling "wE wAnT cHaNgE nOw!"

Zero Waste Homestead Yıl önce

I never bought any because it was always clear to me that the people and companies buying them are doing so out of guilt and are looking for a way to give the ok to the bad behavior instead of just stopping what it is causing the problem in the first place.

Jasmine 6 aylar önce

I beg to differ, not all of them are ok-ing their behavior. I’m shifting to low-impact lifestyle but whatever I do I will still create some emission. Those remaining emissions I offset because I just can’t avoid them. I’ve seen the same with some environmentalists that I follow

Fernando Torre-Mora Yıl önce

that was more complete than I thought it would be, good job!

roomie4rent Yıl önce

I've been buying offsets for several years now. I do endeavor to ensure I'm funding reputable brokers/projects but, as is everything in life, there are no guarantees. There's fraud and misappropriation in every business, but doing nothing is no recourse. Better to police the system than end it entirely.

Oscar Alejandro Rosa de Leon 2 aylar önce

Where do you buy it?

N E Yıl önce

I think carbon offseting is not the end goal but rather a means to achieving net zero. Quality carbon offset would be good to help companies transition to be more sustainable in the future. It gives them time to invest in new technologies that emit less emissions in the future, without creating negative economic consequences in the present time (since abruptly switching to low-emission technologies and operations could cause other problems such as job losses, inflation, etc.). That being said, again, companies should not continue depending on carbon offsets in the long run

Petitio Principii Yıl önce

Thanks for providing the sources, the studies. Greenpeace itself isn't exactly tremendously trustworthy, with their mindless opposition to GMOs, even stuff like golden rice.

Jenna Kenney Yıl önce

Wow thank you what an eye opener! I think I would need to research before buying a carbon offset!

MrGilang100 Yıl önce

Coming as someone who lives in Indonesia, i love that almost every videos on climate and/or inequality always put the blames mainly on the big corporations and not the usually corrupt government on the global south. I get it, to the western audience the overarching influences of big corporations is the main societal issues that need to be dealt with, but, due to the disproportionate influence of western media to the global south, it creates the situation where the local corrupt government can still doing their same corrupt way while yelling "ThIs iS ThE wAlL StReEt fAuLt". Im not suggesting that the companies should not be blamed, im suggesting to introduce the context on how most of global sout government works to know that people or at least the governments in global south has some agency in the problem regarding climate and/or inequality.

l0stdest1ny Yıl önce

Totally agree with your point. They could at least mention that corrupt global south governments don't take actions. But as usual, people in foreign countries have no hand in the matters of another country. The only thing they could do is raise awareness and influence the people to make decisions they can make, such as being skeptical towards big corporations and eventually boycotting them.

DW Planet A Yıl önce

Thanks for your feedback. We have touched on this with regards to the plastic export trade in the following video: "Your plastic waste might be traded by criminals" trvid.com/video/video-tID-AChSg7o.html

MrGilang100 Yıl önce

@DW Planet A You welcome. I will check at that video as soon i got the opportunity. Thank you for the response and keep up the good work.

MrGilang100 Yıl önce

@Crassadon Well, you say it better than how can i say it. The problems are different. Maybe in developed countries it is corporations that tried to wash their hand,in developing countries it is different. Most of our food already comes from local sources and while we are lacking in the recycling department, we do more of the "re-use" aspect of 3R (It is quite common to see single use plastic to be reused as grocery carrier or packed food storage for example). The main problem here is usually governmental corruotion that causing a lax enforcement of environmental protection laws or even the lack of the law in the first place. Developed countries problems mainly comes from consumption, developing countries problems usually comes from production.

var null Yıl önce

The fact that there exists an anime where these issues with carbon markets were called out, almost as a background detail, in 2009 continues to be one of the strangest things. Shangri-la, for those curious

Ixiki Yıl önce

Companies who sign net zero sbti pledges cannot use offsets to reach their goals. But offsets are extremely important to remove existing gigatons of co2.

Selin Ugurtas 4 aylar önce

This was great journalism! Thank you.

gregorkrajcovic Yıl önce

Wow, thanks for this information. I was absolutely not aware of this schema.

klugshicer Yıl önce

Thanks for the video on this important topic. In Switzerland you can get incentives for replacing your oil/gas heater with wood or heat pump, financed with carbon offsets. Personally I find this ridiculous for multiple reasons: -Installing new oil/gas heaters is illegal anyway in some Cantons (for example Zürich) -Oil/gas heaters may be cheaper to install, but they are already cheaper in the long run without subsidies (so most would’ve been built anyway) -you „surrender“ your prevented emissions. So you‘re not allowed to feel good about it. (bc of double accounting) I wonder what happens if a new renter asks about the heating system. Are they gonna say „actually wood but technically oil“?

Meerkat Hero Yıl önce

@hurrdurrmurrgurr They have abundace of wood in Switzerland loged in sustainable managed forests, for centuries already. Oil and gas in the contrary are 100% imported and everything but sustainable.

hurrdurrmurrgurr Yıl önce

@Meerkat Hero According to Global Forest Watch Switzerland has lost 2.6% of its forest cover in the last twenty years. All things considered that is a low number but it isn't neutral and convincing people to switch further into biomass will only accelerate that figure. I agree oil/gas heaters should be switched out but for electric and geothermal heating not trees.

Meerkat Hero Yıl önce

@hurrdurrmurrgurr The loss is related to urbanisation and recent droughts harming the forests in some cantons. Something the statitic created from satellite observation data does not show. Clearcuts are forbidden by law in Switzerland, although, every tree logged must be replanted. In fact a lots of pasture land is turning into forests since grazing on the high pastures stopped due to economical reasons.

Sue Ellerman Yıl önce

That is so bloody depressing; however I'm truly gad I watched it, thanks for the research and information.

Fotis Papadopoulos Yıl önce

Really informative video, thanks a lot for sharing!

Joe Black Yıl önce

Care must also be taken to not just keep carbon in circulation. They have to bury the trees deep in exhausted mines. Essentially recreate the carboniferous. To have any real, long lasting, impact. Or, if they want to be frugal, carbon processed from trees. Wood contains more than carbon after all. Even peatlands can burn during a severe drought.

DW Planet A Yıl önce

Hey Joe, Thanks for your comment. Have you seen our video on Carbon Capture? trvid.com/video/video-JHs-eWHb16g.html Don't forget to hit that subscribe button. We release a video every Friday!

LoveAll 9 aylar önce

These companies are not cheating just the regulators, but the whole of living beings themselves included.

Brett Slater 5 aylar önce

Yes, I have already bought carbon credits here in Australia, with a company that is using the Blockchain and cryptocurrencies to achieve the goal. I'm not buying carpet credits off an airline or a Energy company, I am personally buying carbon credits to offset myself.

Tesla Cannon Yıl önce

So is there a list of which offset companies are transparent and following their commitments?

Panamaniac Yıl önce

Doesn’t it also come down to who is paying for it though? Like if it is a project the government would have had to pay for, instead a corporation is paying for it, thus saving taxpayer dollars and ensuring the project gets done, rather than having it get stopped because of a term limit or office change canceling the project?

Go with Jess Yıl önce

I weirdly enough had the chance to interview for a company that manages these projects. To which I had all these questions going into the position- coincidence?

Rich Dobbs Yıl önce

Destruction of surplus industrial gases shouldn't happen because of carbon offsets. It should be part of the cradle-to-grave responsibility of the manufacturer. Heck you folks have large deposits to drive recycling of PET bottles. Can't you do the same for this issue?

Its Myright Yıl önce

Didn't even know they were a thing. Would buy it personally according to the Gold Standard

Jan-Maarten 7 aylar önce

Great and helpful video, love it! Additional, no leakage, no double counting, got it. Maybe add benevolent? (carbon offsets should cause no human rights violations or environmental damage)

Jakub Chalupa Yıl önce

Another problem is that fully grown trees are kinda carbon neutral. If they don't grow anymore, they are not capturing any additional CO2 anymore, they use it to produce leafs and fruits, which, once they fall down or are consumed, eventually release all that CO2 back into the atmosphere. What you have to do is cut that tree down and make sure that the wood from it never gets burned down or decays - you can make into coal and tar and burry it into ground forever. And where the old tree grew, you plant another. Theoretically, you could have a system in which you first use the wood as furniture or in construction and you designate it as carbon sequestors, and once the wood is no longer usable, then you put it in ground as coal and store as wood tar. But you absolutely must make sure it doesn't ever ever get burned down in a natural gas plant or at homes, which is the case for most wood waste nowdays (with the additional step of becoming recycled paper or glued construction wood waste, but it all eventualy ends up getting burned with the exception of books)

Sierra Davis Yıl önce

Aspiration, which may not count as a bank but I use it as one, plants a tree with every purchase and offsets gas purchases if you pay a membership fee. I think it used to be free. But this video made me rethink what that actually means. I don't even have a car so it's not doing much for me either way. I still prefer this bank to the big ones, but very informative video.

Monkey Business Yıl önce

The most upsetting about the carbon offsets nonsense is that countries and large corporations are too willing to adopt it and quick congratulate themselves for job well-done as if climate change has been averted.

Thecrippled Pancake Yıl önce

Instead of congratulating them for going “carbon neutral” we should be putting them out of business for doing so much harm for so long.

Fay Yıl önce

@VsstDtbs so from that i can deduct that you do not wipe yours, cant say im surprised

tjs Yıl önce

What about all the men that also eat? Lol this is so flawed

justFuries Yıl önce

Fedora-wearing cringelord. Check.

Mᴥāz Kalīm Yıl önce

Doesn't your argument has to make the connection that women invented Free Market Capitalism, "@VsstDtbs"?

Gallectee Aylar önce

I have been reading a lot of economics books, and all the rage right now is how the major issues that we are dealing with on our planet are because of the lack of markets. That experiential value is disregarded because of a lack of its exchange value, and the question I have, since this is a perfect example of markets failing, is how are the market fundamentalists/neoliberals going to handle this issue since their go to response is always "more markets, more privatization, and less government"?

Peter Jones 10 aylar önce

I was always suspicious about them. Even more so now.

Mohamed Kamal Yıl önce

Great video - keep up the good content!

D Gillies Yıl önce

We need some sort of tough accreditation program like greenpeace-certified carbon offsets!

György Névery Yıl önce

It's nice that you are focusing on serious issues like this, though isn't this a bit wasted time and energy. I would love to see that you are coming up with solutions, maybe begin a debate with relevant players and follow up on them, so it's not only empty words. You could also use the reach of this many people to initiate movements, put pressure on governments, or locate and support institutions and companies whom are working on the case. Im a bit tiered with scary reports which leads to nowhere. Be the leader, not just the bullier. We have way to many who is talking and way to few who is walking.

SpruceOaks Yıl önce

Actual carbon offsets are legit. A company guilt-tripping you into paying them more and them calling it a "carbon offset" is a scam.

kangaroo Yıl önce

before this, every country was polluting unchecked.. so while not perfect, they had to start somewhere. We are now at a new milestone, and should take the next step. which is why we need active governmental control. Otherwise companies will just look at profit.

Max Beran Yıl önce

The loss of whatever was to be harvested on that rewetted moorland will be replaced presumably at a carbon cost. The manager herself admitted as much when she referred to the carbon emissions from the agricultural use of the land. So if it's not happening there on that moor, it will have to happen somewhere else. You can't draw a tight boundary around some single simple activity; you have to consider its knock-on effects.

tiago tabosa Yıl önce

It's as if the best way to reduce emissions is to actually regulate big companies to reduce their emissions and not buy offsets..

Srab23 Yıl önce

I thought reaching net zero was about eliminating emission and fix the root problem. This is unfortunate news to me

Ken Johnson Yıl önce

@13:25 "The IPCC calculations show that it will be extremely hard to reach our climate targets without some form of offsets." What the IPCC says is that it will be difficult or impossible to achieve our climate targets without negative emissions. Offsets, by definition, don't reduce carbon emissions; they are just a shell game that moves emissions from one source to another -- generally from the most expensive to the least expensive marginal reductions. The problem is, those cheap reductions can't get us to net-zero, let alone net-negative; we're still going to have to make the more difficult and expensive emission cuts, which will likely be much more expensive -- or impossible -- without early action. Offsets are are a form of institutionalized procrastination and delay -- just kick the can down the road. Contributing to bonafide emission reduction projects should be encouraged as "charitable contributions" without any expectation that they can "offset" or avoid the need to make emission reductions elsewhere. You can't clean up the garbage by just moving it from one side of the street to the other.

Adrian Thoroughgood 10 aylar önce

It's not that the offset doesn't reduce emissions, it's that using it to mean you don't try to reduce your own emissions defeats the benefit of it. We need to do both.

StellariumSound Yıl önce

I've never even heard of these. Maybe instead of asking consumers to pay, companies could.

Chirayu Shishodiya Yıl önce

Great content, this channel is worthy of millions of subscribers.

DW Planet A Yıl önce

Don't forget to hit the subscribe button, Chirayu. We release a video every Friday.

oldie4210 3 aylar önce

A number of years back, I moved a indigenous person from the west coast of BC Canada shortly after Trudeau’s first carbon tax was initiated. I was told by this person that his reserve had their rain forest surveyed for its carbon sink, which was then annually sold to Toyota, who applied it to their carbon footprint. It is a government tax scam.

Fraaank41 Aylar önce

In New Zealand large companies buy good productive farmland and convert them to Pine Trees. They might be faster growing, but they aren't native and like stated, a fire can wipe the lot out. Unfortunately they aren't forced to grow native bush.

Michael RCH Yıl önce

As per the Climate Town video on this, think of carbon offsets as nothing more than a thank you note for projects trying to reduce emissions. They are no excuse for not reducing your own personal and corporate emissions.

Keno Yıl önce

If a lot of these projects are just preventing man made damage in the first place, then they're not even offsetting anything anyway?!

Ioana Maria Groza Yıl önce

Only if I could very the project(s) as you did. Thank you for the video!

DW Planet A Yıl önce

Hit that subscribe button! We release a new video every Friday.

Aljuvialle Yıl önce

Even without such videos I know, that companies are cheating. My first reaction after mass-spreading would be "never pay additional offsets, it's a scam", other can be "Never buy their products", but it's less likely on global market like we have. I'd prefer to be able to make donations worldwide donations to specific projects, which can show and guarantee somehow their sustainability. Which problem I see here? people are greedy, everywhere. and greed is one of the main causes of almost all (if not every) climate problems we have today

ほら素敵な君さ Yıl önce

Thanks for this great episode

Bcat BB Yıl önce

did you know you can buy carbon credits? i learned this while in college and it baffled me. one of the easiest thing for a company to whitewash their pollution is set up shell companies and have them sell it to their real one, easy green card

Luke S. Yıl önce

King of the Hill made fun of this concept in the early 00’s and here we are still having the same conversation. We are so screwed, everything is a joke

erjusik Yıl önce

I wish you also mentioned mono-culture tree planting for offsets. Only mixed and native species should be planted

Raoul Luijten Yıl önce

I do it privately to stimulate this sector, even knowing it is flawed, very flawed. I always compare this to the chocolate quality labels. One might have slavefree, the other fair trade the other Rainforrest alliance, but only if people start buying them and they get recognition will people start comparing them and will clarity arrive regarding the differences between the different labels. Nothing exists or comes intoe existence a vacuum, generally these type of innovations are the result of decades of dialogue, discussion and "product" itterations. Professionally I am trying my supermarket chain to achieve a net zero label (scope 1 and 2) for just the supermarket, rather than the whole supply chain. Knowing this is in fact a bit of a shit offering. I see it as the only way that I can show concrete marketable sustainability results that my co-workers, will actually understand and respect. It is a sad reality, but you need to think in increments that eventually will lead to the read goal. The increment here being, my company understanding that investments in sustainability can result in image improvement and eventually...... sales (kill me please).