Live data from Hacker News

Investigation: 78% of carbon offset projects globally are “likely junk“

power-technology.com

11–20 of 173 posts

Re: Investigation: 78% of carbon offset projects globally are “likely junk“

#11
post #2

I would have guessed higher than 78%.

It is much higher. From the guardian article, the "analysis" this link discusses:

"39 ... were categorised as likely junk", "Eight others (16%) look problematic", "the remaining three projects (6%) could not be determined definitively".

The original article was submitted here too, but didnt get any upvotes.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/sep/19/do-carbo...

Re: Investigation: 78% of carbon offset projects globally are “likely junk“

#13
post #6

Are the other 22 % certain junk? The effects fundamentally do not seem offsetable. The offset industry is based on an idea that you can remove greenhouse impacts from your process without a significant impact on prices, and a corporation is somehow better positioned to donate to a fund than a consumer is. That's bullshit.

The most verifiable type of offset that I've heard about is landfill methane capture. You can measure the amount of methane captured, and that is what you've offset.

Re: Investigation: 78% of carbon offset projects globally are “likely junk“

#14
Three years ago I entered this business as I saw some opportunity. After about a year I got out because everything there was fraud. F R A U D.

>most of them exaggerate climate benefits and underestimate the potential harm [...]

>projects were categorised as “likely junk or worthless” due to one or more “fundamental failing” that undermines its alleged emissions offsetting power [...]

Stop trying to disguise these operations as something else than fraud. These people made no "mistakes", this not a "sorry, we didn't know better" situation, they DID know. It is plain old pre-meditated fraud, the owners knew they were selling crap from the start, they lied about it, still lie about it and they get to profit off that.

Edit: Funny, some invisible hand just moved my post from being the top comment for the past hour and getting lots of upvotes every minute, to the very bottom. I must be onto something here :).

Re: Investigation: 78% of carbon offset projects globally are “likely junk“

#15

Are there any that aren't junk? Wren got a lot of promotion by YouTubers recently. Maybe they were paid to say nice things? Doesn't prove it's junk though? Where would you invest if you wanted to help?

Lawyers and organizations that have proven track record of fighting timber, oil, and mass polluters in court.

Re: Investigation: 78% of carbon offset projects globally are “likely junk“

#16
Carbon cap and trade, Carbon Offsets, and any other scheme to "cap and market" pollution is not about saving the environment, it is protectionist program of wealth redistribution nothing more.

These programs are about control, and wealth redistribution lets stop pretending otherwise

Re: Investigation: 78% of carbon offset projects globally are “likely junk“

#17
This is in the voluntary carbon markets, quite separate to regulated carbon markets. It is unfortunate that so many may be junk, but in the end 380 billion T of carbon needs to be removed from the atmosphere between 2050 and 2100 to keep earth at 1.5 degree warming, assuming we hit current net zero pledges. This just means more regulation is needed for trust, not that carbon markets themselves should be ditched.

Re: Investigation: 78% of carbon offset projects globally are “likely junk“

#18

Are there any that aren't junk? Wren got a lot of promotion by YouTubers recently. Maybe they were paid to say nice things? Doesn't prove it's junk though? Where would you invest if you wanted to help?

lifestyle changes, better business practices, and clean energy.

Re: Investigation: 78% of carbon offset projects globally are “likely junk“

#19

They just turn everything into a new way to make money. I’m not even mad, it’s kind of impressive at this point, and they keep getting away with it! What’s next? Pay-per-use single occupant gender neutral restrooms?

The restroom debate is always odd to me, I would 100% pay to use "single occupant gender neutral restroom"

Public Restrooms are terrible, I would prefer to be alone when I am using them. I am not sure why people fight so hard to preserve something so bad....

Re: Investigation: 78% of carbon offset projects globally are “likely junk“

#20

They just turn everything into a new way to make money. I’m not even mad, it’s kind of impressive at this point, and they keep getting away with it! What’s next? Pay-per-use single occupant gender neutral restrooms?

I mean, I'm a bit mad after living through the hottest summer of my life.
Post reply on HN