The Great Climate Scandal. Part 3: Matt Shea visits the Corporate Investments into Forestry and Biodiversity event

“Do you feel that offsetting is just a load of shit?”

This is the third post in a REDD-Monitor series about the Channel 4 documentary, “The Great Climate Scandal,” which takes a look at the world of carbon offsetting.

The previous two posts are here:

Matt Shea, the presenter of the documentary, was keen to talk to people in the carbon offsetting industry.

His team got permission to film at the Corporate Investments into Forestry and Biodiversity event. Shea was particularly keen to ask the Verra employees at the event about their projects in Cambodia.

“They really hate them at The Guardian”

In the taxi on the way to the event, Shea explains that,

“It’s basically a who’s who of every major company in the UK: Shell; Glencore; Trafigura. So basically all the biggest oil and mining companies seem to want to be investing in biodiversity and forestry protection. What is going on?”

As soon as Shea and his team arrived, the organisers approached them. “They seemed nervous about us being there,” Shea comments.

“Do you feel that offsetting is just a load of shit?” a representative from CE Events & Media, the event organiser asks Shea. “Or do you think it’s, are you taking a political stance? . . . They’ve been getting bad press, from The Guardian principally and we don’t agree necessarily with what The Guardian are saying.”

“We’re just coming at it from an objective point of view and looking to find out facts, and find out more about it,” Shea replies.

Shea follows someone from CE Events & Media into a corridor. “You know The Guardian?” she asks. “They really hate them at The Guardian. . . . There’s significant concern about people being scared to talk about what they’re doing.”

She asks Shea to go up on the stage to introduce his project:

“Hi everyone, I just wanted to I just wanted to quickly introduce myself. My name is Matt and we’re just doing a documentary about the whole carbon offsetting trend, about the market. We really want to just understand what you like about it what you don’t like, what’s working, what isn’t working.”

Shea comments afterwards that he’s never had to introduce himself to “a bunch of people who were that displeased to see me”.

One after another, companies decline to talk to Shea. “I'm asking relatively easy questions,” Shea says, “but even despite that people are still reluctant to talk to me. Which makes me question what are they worried I’m going to ask?”

Here’s how Shea got on with some of the companies at the event:

Eni

The Italian oil company Eni were at the event. In June 2023, the Italian TV channel Rai 3 travelled to Zambia to investigate the Luangwa Community Forests Project. Eni buys carbon offsets from the project.

Shea asks a representative of Eni whether she’d managed to speak to the company’s communications person about whether they could have a chat. “Er, no. Not really,” she says.

Equinor

Shea asks Norwegian oil company Equinor for an interview. “Not now, I don’t think,” comes the reply. “We’re keeping under the radar a little bit.”

Equinor is anything but “under the radar”. The company is two-thirds owned by the Norwegian government, which is by far the world’s biggest funder of REDD and one of the world’s biggest oil exporters.

Norway’s oil industry was behind REDD from the start.

In December 2007, when Norway announced its plans to save the rainforests, Åslaug Haga, then Norway’s Minister of Petroleum and Energy, presented the scheme along with Jens Stoltenberg, Norway’s then-prime minister, and Erik Solheim, who was then Minister of the Environment and International Development.

“The industry is under so much fire”

Some people did talk to Shea.

Stenver Jerkku is the CEO and founder of a company called Solid World, which calls itself the “Digital Warehouse for Climate Finance”.

He tells Shea that,

“The industry is under so much fire, ever since The Guardian article and everybody else. . . .

“Some people were very disappointed to find out that the credits they bought were not real. A lot of people think that carbon credits are a scam. There’s a lot of really good projects. There are also a lot of very questionable projects and that’s the truth.”

Nikol Ostianova is the Development Lead at Treevaluation, a company that develops nature-based solutions with farming communities.

Shea asks her what her view is on the offset market. She laughs. “It has its own place,” she says.

“I feel like you’re not telling me your actual view of the offset market,” Shea says.

Ostianova laughs again. “It depends who uses carbon credits and for what purpose.”

“So for example Shell, British Airways?” Shea asks.

“They are usually washing their hands with carbon credits,” Ostianova replies.

Shea talks to Philip Cottle of ForestRe, which insures investments into forestry, forest biomass and biofuels.

“I think a lot of the issue comes around the fact that they’re sold, these carbon credits, as removing permanently some carbon from the atmosphere.” Shea says. “That’s not true, is it?”

“This, er,” he starts. “OK, you can tell, ’cause I’m looking at the ceiling.” He laughs.

Verra

Shea tried to talk to Verra. “They were apprehensive to chat to me,” Shea says.

He asked Naomi Swickard, director of REDD+ Program Development and Innovation at Verra, for a quick interview.

“What is your take on that at this point?” Swickard asks Shea.

“I don’t have a take,” Shea replies. “That’s for you to give me.”

“I would have to check with my communications,” Swickard replies.

Shea tries again later, asking someone else for an interview at the Verra exhibition stand. “Can I send you an email address to engage with first?” he replies.

“Verra keep running away when I try to speak to them,” Shea says, laughing.

A little later, he tries to talk to Naomi Swickard after she came out of a presentation.

“I was wondering if you had spoken to your communications people and whether they had allowed you to speak to me,” Shea says.

“Let me see if they have written back,” Swickard replies. “It might take a minute.”

“OK, I’ll come back,” Shea says.

On the way to the second day of the conference the following morning, Heydon Prowse, the documentary producer, tells Shea that, “The media team from Verra have said that the timing is short notice, might be a bit challenging, but we’ll see what we can do.”

“Let’s see if they actually do appear for some kind of interview because they should be able to answer these questions right of the bat,” Shea says in the taxi to the event. “It is their jobs.”

He talks to Swickard again. “So I spoke to your communication officer, he said they would try and find a time today. Did they speak to you?”

“No,” Swickard replies. “The last I heard, Joel was going to set something up for another time. It’s not about my willingness to speak. It’s about what our comms team wants to do.”

Shea goes into one of the meeting rooms where Verra is on the panel. When it comes to the questions after the presentations, Shea gets his chance.

“There’s a forestry project, Southern Cardamom in Cambodia, that’s been accused of human rights abuses,” he says. “A question for Verra. Did you verify this project, and if so, what’s your response to these allegations?”

“I actually don’t have any of that information on hand so I can’t answer that question,” Sinclair Vincent, director of Sustainable Development Innovation at Verra, replies from the stage.

“There are accusations that people were, their property was burned, Indigenous People by the Wildlife Alliance which manages the project,” Shea says.

“I’m sorry, I don’t have the details,” Vincent says. “That is a project that has gone through our system, but also if that project is under review it would not be appropriate to talk about during the review because we are an independent standard body.”

Outside the meeting room, one of the conference organisers asks Shea’s team to stop filming. Shea leaves the conference:

“So, we’ve just been asked to stop filming at the conference because I asked a question about alleged human rights abuses.

“In any situation where you’re a journalist and a simple question, especially in our case, one that’s already been publicly reported, leads you to being asked to stop filming, it just raises more questions.

“And it’s not a good look to avoid scrutiny. If your goal is to save the planet, and this isn’t just about money, then surely the more scrutiny the better.”

---