Verified hot air: how a popular carbon offset project in Peru has taken tens of millions of dollars from hundreds of companies and individuals but done nothing to prevent climate change
Verified hot air: how a popular carbon offset project in Peru has taken tens of millions of dollars from hundreds of companies and individuals but done nothing to prevent climate change
reddmonitor.substack.com
By Simon Counsell A new investigation into a REDD+ project in the rainforests of Peru, which has sold a total of nearly ten million carbon credits to hundreds of companies and individuals around the world, has revealed that the scheme generated no real carbon savings, and that deforestation in the area actually increased dramatically after the project started. Detailed analysis of how the project’s carbon credits were generated has found that there was no basis for ‘additionality’, the deforestation ‘baseline’ was grossly exaggerated to create the appearance of reduced deforestation and thus emissions reductions, and that loopholes in the methodology allowed for huge amounts of actual emissions to go unaccounted for. Monitoring on behalf of the verifier, Verra, belatedly spotted serious problems, but millions of ‘verified carbon units’ (VCUs, i.e. carbon credits) were approved nonetheless.
Verified hot air: how a popular carbon offset project in Peru has taken tens of millions of dollars from hundreds of companies and individuals but done nothing to prevent climate change
Verified hot air: how a popular carbon offset…
Verified hot air: how a popular carbon offset project in Peru has taken tens of millions of dollars from hundreds of companies and individuals but done nothing to prevent climate change
By Simon Counsell A new investigation into a REDD+ project in the rainforests of Peru, which has sold a total of nearly ten million carbon credits to hundreds of companies and individuals around the world, has revealed that the scheme generated no real carbon savings, and that deforestation in the area actually increased dramatically after the project started. Detailed analysis of how the project’s carbon credits were generated has found that there was no basis for ‘additionality’, the deforestation ‘baseline’ was grossly exaggerated to create the appearance of reduced deforestation and thus emissions reductions, and that loopholes in the methodology allowed for huge amounts of actual emissions to go unaccounted for. Monitoring on behalf of the verifier, Verra, belatedly spotted serious problems, but millions of ‘verified carbon units’ (VCUs, i.e. carbon credits) were approved nonetheless.