Connect with us

Published

on

Rachel Rose Jackson & Adrien Tofighi-Niaki of Corporate Accountability are lead researchers on a new report on the effectiveness of carbon offset reforms.

As we pen this, the world’s governments are gathered in Bonn, Germany, for a round of tense climate negotiations that must deliver fruitful progress if COP30 later this year in Belém has any chance of helping us avoid complete climate breakdown. Simultaneously, industry actors, policymakers and thousands of participants are coming together in London for more than 700 events meant to catalyse local to global climate collaboration.

We all know what is at stake should the world fail.

For decades, carbon offsets (or “pollution allowances” purchased by polluting actors and counted towards their emissions reductions) and the voluntary carbon market (VCM, which links up offsets into a globally tradable market) have been consistently promoted by world policymakers and the private sector as our key to addressing climate change.

Yet they have never, not once, correlated with a sustained decrease in global greenhouse gas emissions. Today, dozens upon dozens of independent studies and investigations repeatedly remind us of the fundamental failures of offsets and the VCM.

Pará’s Amazon forest carbon deal in doubt as prosecutors move to block it

Yet, the VCM is predicted to reach values of up to US$27 billion by 2035, signalling the clear intent to go “all in” on a scheme that has repeatedly proven its own failure. Meanwhile, leading scientists and the UN Secretary-General have warned against dubious offsets and put the VCM on notice, insisting the industry plug its holes or sink the ship.

VCM 2.0

In response to years of public exposure of its failures, the VCM industry is trying to defend its legitimacy through a coordinated reformation strategy – the “VCM 2.0.” New industry-led initiatives, methodologies, and standards have been launched to rescue the VCM – in a rush to assure investors that the Titanic’s holes are being plugged and that the iceberg is not fatal.

Going “all in” on offsets and the VCM means betting our futures, massive resources, and the ability of the planet to sustain human life on a mechanism that has failed to prove its competence for decades.

To understand how risky this bet is, we looked at “VCM 2.0” performance in 2024 to see if there are any signs that these reforms are spurring fundamental shifts, or whether carbon offsets are still beyond fixing.

Carbon credit auditors suspended for failures in sham rice-farming offsets

Widespread use of ‘problem’ offsets

What we found was concerning, but not surprising. Despite ongoing reforms, problematic offsets – with failings that mean they may not deliver the carbon savings they represent – remain the norm.

More than 47.7 million problematic offsets were “retired” (VCM lingo for purchased and counted towards emissions reductions) by 43 of the world’s largest projects in 2024, accounting for nearly a quarter of the entire VCM. None of these offsets can be counted on to deliver the promised emissions reductions, yet they are used by actors around the world, often in lieu of truly reducing emissions. In addition, we found that:

  • Eighty percent of the offsets assessed were unlikely to deliver the promised emissions reductions.
  • Nearly all (or 93%) of the projects retiring problematic credits are located in the Global Soth, countries that have historically contributed the least to climate change. This includes five projects in Brazil, host of the U.N climate talks later this year.
  • The approval and promotion of problematic offsets spreads much further than one or two “bad apples.” Four registries and at least 17 verifiers were involved in approving these problematic offsets, signalling much broader responsibility for the failure of the VCM to deliver emissions cuts.
  • Forestry and land use projects and renewable energy projects are among the most utilised problematic projects, though other sectors were also involved.
  • All 37 projects we looked at in greater detail had a legitimate risk of having at least one fundamental failing that rendered the projects unlikely to deliver – totalling nearly 40 million credits. These projects either had a legitimate or high risk of non-additionality (23), non-permanence (14), leakage (17), or over-crediting (19).

Dangerous to ignore failings

This new research, which is just the tip of the iceberg, suggests that despite ongoing reforms, the VCM 2.0 continues to largely fail. Carbon offsets are hastening the likelihood of global climate action failure, not preventing it. Any advances through this reform appear to be limited in scope and potential, posing the question of why VCM supporters and investors continue to take on the liability in the face of proven (and repeated) failure.

Indigenous land disputes cloud Kenya’s carbon market ambitions

These findings, combined with the work of many other experts, necessitates clarity on who is responsible for the repeated failures of the ‘checks and balances’ of the VCM for the last decades. It’s time we reckon with what this research and the overwhelming evidence so clearly lays bare – that the VCM is still driving us head first toward the iceberg, and that offsets rip open rather than plug leaking holes, despite claims of reforms.

It is evident that 2024 repeated the failures of the past. We cannot entrust the VCM industry to captain the ship of climate action any longer. If we do, we know that humanity’s collision with the fatal iceberg is all but guaranteed.

*Neither Corporate Accountability nor the authors have any conflict to disclose. Corporate Accountability does not take any funding from corporations or governments. It is funded primarily by individuals and carefully vetted foundations.*

The post World’s largest carbon projects unlikely to deliver emissions cuts despite reforms appeared first on Climate Home News.

World’s largest carbon projects unlikely to deliver emissions cuts despite reforms

Continue Reading

Climate Change

China’s Shark Finning Could Lead to US Seafood Sanctions

Published

on

A formal petition to the U.S. government calls for sanctions on Chinese seafood imports as it highlights China’s loophole-ridden illegal shark fin trade.

For migrant workers trapped onboard Chinese distant water fishing fleets, cutting the fins off sharks as they writhe violently on rusted decks in the Indian Ocean isn’t accidental. It’s an intentional and lucrative act that marks the start of a bloody half-a-billion-dollar offshore supply chain, tacitly supported by Beijing yet covertly concealed from port inspectors globally.

China’s Shark Finning Could Lead to US Seafood Sanctions

Continue Reading

Climate Change

New data shows rich nations likely missed 2025 goal to double adaptation finance

Published

on

New data on international climate finance for 2023 and 2024 suggests that wealthy countries are highly unlikely to have met their pledge to double funding for adaptation in developing nations to around $40 billion a year by 2025 amid cuts to their overseas aid budgets.

At the COP26 climate summit in Glasgow in 2021, all countries agreed to “urge” developed nations to at least double their funding for adaptation in developing countries from 2019 levels of around $20 billion by 2025. Funding for adaptation has lagged behind money to help reduce emissions and remains the dark spot even as the data showed overall climate finance rose to a record $136.7 billion in 2024.

A United Nations Environment Programme report warned last year that wealthy nations were likely to miss the adaptation finance target and the data released on Thursday by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) shows that in 2024 adaptation finance was just under $35 billion.

The OECD, an intergovernmental policy forum for wealthy countries, said the increase between 2022 and 2024 was “modest”, adding that meeting the doubling target would require “strong growth” of close to 20% in 2025.

More cuts likely

The OECD’s figures do not go up to 2025, but several nations announced cuts to climate finance last year. The most notable was the abandonment of US pledges to international climate funds by the new Trump administration but the UK, France, Germany and other wealthy European countries also pared back their contributions.

Joe Thwaites, international finance director at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said developed countries were “not on track” to meet the adaptation funding goal.

Power Shift Africa director Mohamed Adow said adaptation finance is needed to expand flood defences, drought-resistant crops, early warning systems and resilient health services as the world warms, bringing more extreme weather and rising seas. “When that money fails to arrive, people lose homes, harvests and livelihoods – and in the worst cases, their lives,” he warned.

Imane Saidi, a senior researcher at the North Africa-based Imal Initiative, called the $35 billion in adaptation finance in 2024 “a drop in the ocean”, considering that the United Nations estimates the annual adaptation needs of developing countries at between $215 billion and $387 billion.

    If confirmed, a failure to meet the goal is likely to further strain relations between developed and developing countries within the UN climate process. A previous pledge to provide $100 billion a year of total climate finance by 2020 was only met two years late, a failure labelled “dismal” by the UAE’s COP28 President Sultan Al Jaber and many other Global South diplomats.

    Missing that goal would also raise doubts about donor governments’ commitment to meeting their new post-2025 adaptation finance goal. At COP30 last year, governments agreed to urge developed countries to triple adaptation finance – without defining the baseline – by 2035.

    African and other developing countries have pointed to lack of funding as a key flaw in ongoing attempts to set indicators to measure progress on adapting to climate change.

    Speaking to climate ministers from around the world in Copenhagen on Wednesday, Turkish COP31 President Murat Kurum stressed the importance of climate finance. “It is easy to say we support global climate action,” he said, “but promises must be kept.”

    He said the COP31 Presidency will use the new Global Implementation Accelerator and recommendations in the Baku-to-Belem roadmap, published last year, to scale up climate finance – and will hold donors accountable for their collective finance goals.

    He noted that developed countries should this year submit their first reports showing how they will deliver their “fair share” of the new broader finance goal set at COP29 in 2024, to deliver $300 billion a year in climate finance by 2035. They are due to report on this once every two years.

    Broader climate finance

    The OECD data shows that the overall amount of climate finance – including funding for emissions cuts – provided by developed countries grew fast in 2023 before declining in 2024. In contrast, the amount of private finance developed countries say they “mobilised” increased in both 2023 and 2024, pushing the top-line figure to a record high.

    While the OECD does not say which countries provided what amounts, data from the ODI Global think-tank suggests that the 2024 cuts to bilateral climate finance were spread broadly among wealthy nations.

    Thwaites of NRDC welcomed the fact that overall climate finance provided and mobilised by developed countries exceeded $130 billion in both 2023 and 2024. He said that this was “well above earlier projections” and “shows that when rich countries work together, they can over-achieve on climate finance goals”.

    But Sehr Raheja, programme officer at the Delhi-based Centre for Science and Environment, said these figures are “modest” when set against the new $300-billion goal.

    “While the headline total figure of climate finance remains alright,” she said, “declining bilateral climate spending raises important questions about the predictability of high-quality, concessional public finance, which has consistently been a key demand of the Global South.”

    She also lamented that loans continue to dominate public climate finance and that mobilised private finance is concentrated in middle-income countries and on emissions-reduction measures rather than adaptation projects. “Private capital continues to follow bankability rather than climate vulnerability or need,” she added.

    Ritu Bharadwaj, climate finance and resilience researcher at the International Institute for Environment and Development, said the figures painted an outdated picture as climate finance has since declined as rich countries shrink their overseas aid budgets and increase spending on defence.

    Last month, the OECD published figures showing that international aid – which includes climate finance – fell by nearly a quarter in 2025. The US was responsible for three-quarters of this decline. The OECD projects a further decline in 2026.

    With Thursday’s climate finance report, the OECD is “publishing a victory lap for 2023 and 2024 at almost the same moment its own aid statistics show the funding base eroding underneath it,” Bharadwaj said.

    The post New data shows rich nations likely missed 2025 goal to double adaptation finance appeared first on Climate Home News.

    New data shows rich nations likely missed 2025 goal to double adaptation finance

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    NextEra Energy to Join the Offshore Wind Club, But Does It Matter?

    Published

    on

    The country’s most valuable utility didn’t like offshore wind. But a proposed merger with Dominion would include a $11.4 billion project in Coastal Virginia.

    A utility megamerger announced this week would mean that the largest offshore wind project in the United States would be owned by the same company that already is the nation’s leading developer of renewables and battery storage.

    NextEra Energy to Join the Offshore Wind Club, But Does It Matter?

    Continue Reading

    Trending

    Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com