The underlying problem here, besides lack of meaning full FIPC, is that the issues raised in the "“ART’s Controversial Certification ..." report (4 points) seem to be carefully concocted financial mechanisms to mask the reality that Guyana’s forests have already been, for eons, fully involved in successfully sequestering carbon, therefore, in actuality, there are no carbon credits there available to sell. But yes, the global North, especially those businesses receiving financial benefit from selling carbon fuels, absolutely MUST make contributions WITH NO STRINGS ATTACHED to nations like Guyana.
The underlying problem here, besides lack of meaning full FIPC, is that the issues raised in the "“ART’s Controversial Certification ..." report (4 points) seem to be carefully concocted financial mechanisms to mask the reality that Guyana’s forests have already been, for eons, fully involved in successfully sequestering carbon, therefore, in actuality, there are no carbon credits there available to sell. But yes, the global North, especially those businesses receiving financial benefit from selling carbon fuels, absolutely MUST make contributions WITH NO STRINGS ATTACHED to nations like Guyana.