However, I think it’s important to highlight that that there are legitimate and beneficial (to the climate and local communities) carbon dioxide removal (CDR) nature-based projects like community agroforestry.
CDR is an essential element of getting to net zero alongside emissions reduction, as highlighted by the IPCC in 2022, and the distinction between CDR and the type of carbon offsets/avoidance called out here should be made really clear so as not to undermine the potential of CDR as a part of climate solutions.
Tom Goldtooth, of IEN, calls it "carbon capitalism," while it could be more directly called "carbon colonialism" since colonialism includes capitalism while capitalism does not necessarily include colonialism. The system of REDD+ breaks because the offsets have no historical record of effectiveness and the forest land was already in use absorbing all the carbon it could and especially it *belonged* to someone else! That's where colonialism comes in - enforcing power by theft (capitalism) but also by seizing the rights to the land (colonialism). Like Ivonne Yanez says, “Support must come without strings attached — no carbon credits, no offsets — just direct resources to sustain their traditional practices.” Oxygen-pricing would do this by definition; carbon credits never will.
It makes absolutely no sense to even consider carbon offsetting when we know the land has absorbed no carbon in 2023.
Great article, REDD+ has been very damaging.
However, I think it’s important to highlight that that there are legitimate and beneficial (to the climate and local communities) carbon dioxide removal (CDR) nature-based projects like community agroforestry.
CDR is an essential element of getting to net zero alongside emissions reduction, as highlighted by the IPCC in 2022, and the distinction between CDR and the type of carbon offsets/avoidance called out here should be made really clear so as not to undermine the potential of CDR as a part of climate solutions.
Tom Goldtooth, of IEN, calls it "carbon capitalism," while it could be more directly called "carbon colonialism" since colonialism includes capitalism while capitalism does not necessarily include colonialism. The system of REDD+ breaks because the offsets have no historical record of effectiveness and the forest land was already in use absorbing all the carbon it could and especially it *belonged* to someone else! That's where colonialism comes in - enforcing power by theft (capitalism) but also by seizing the rights to the land (colonialism). Like Ivonne Yanez says, “Support must come without strings attached — no carbon credits, no offsets — just direct resources to sustain their traditional practices.” Oxygen-pricing would do this by definition; carbon credits never will.