The "Vast majority" of environmental projects most commonly used within the voluntary carbon market to offset greenhouse gas emissions seem to have "Fundamental failings" and cannot be relied upon to tackle global warming, according to a joint investigation from the Guardian and non-profit climate watchdog Corporate Accountability.
The investigation analysed the top 50 emission offset projects, selected because they have sold the most carbon credits within the global VCM, and found that most of them exaggerate climate benefits and underestimate the potential harm caused by the project's activity.
The most popular projects traded globally include forestry schemes, hydroelectric dams, solar and wind farms, waste disposal and greener household appliance schemes across 20 countries, most of which have developing economies.
The data comes from Allied Offsets, the world's biggest and most comprehensive emissions trading database, which aggregates information about projects traded within the VCM from their inception.
The analysis found that 39, or 78%, of the 50 projects were categorised as "Likely junk or worthless" due to one or more "Fundamental failing" that undermines its alleged emissions offsetting power.
The criteria for assessing whether a project is likely junk was based on whether there was "Compelling evidence" or a high risk that the project could not guarantee additional GHG emission cuts.
In some cases, there was evidence to suggest that projects were leaking further, additional emissions or simply shifting emissions elsewhere.
https://www.power-technology.com/news/report-majority-carbon-offsets-junk-or-useless/
No comments:
Post a Comment