Carsten Brinkschulte’s Post

View profile for Carsten Brinkschulte, graphic

Serial entrepreneur (telecoms) turned green * Using technology to prevent wildfires * CEO Dryad Networks

This article, once again, raises a valid concern regarding nature based solutions (NBS) and carbon credits as a whole. If credits are issued for forests which then are burnt by destructive wildfires beyond what was set aside as a buffer, the credits will have had no effect and even worse - granted polluters the right to continue doing so without the balancing effect of carbon capture. However, maybe it is too harsh to throw the entire concept of nature based carbon credits into the greenwashing bin. I think it all is about the money, as always. For example, if the money given to a forest owner for carbon credits is used to plant new trees or to protect or improve the forest health conditions, the carbon credits will have a positive impact on climate change, even if there is a risk that the forest goes up in smoke. Without carbon credits, money for postive measures might not be available and thus would not happen. In the end, I think it's all about verification, trust and accountability - which is where the problem is. How can we know and trust that money given to carbon credit issuers will be used to improve the forest rather than for profit without having a positive impact? Do we trust that the verification mechanisms put in place are effective and not corrupt? Of course in the end, the article has a point in stating that the real solution to climate change is not carbon credits, but phasing out fossil fuels. https://lnkd.in/dSWFJwu2

Carbon Offsets Are Climate Scams. Wildfires Will Make Them Worse.

Carbon Offsets Are Climate Scams. Wildfires Will Make Them Worse.

https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org

To view or add a comment, sign in

Explore topics