WIDESPREAD ABUSE OF CARBON OFFSETTING

The genuine global response to climate change is being severely compromised by inadequate and hastily devised schemes for carbon offsetting.

The idea that greenhouse gases can be cancelled by paying for projects that reduce the gases elsewhere has become the cornerstone of climate politics. However, the concept is open for rourting and and abuse. Those want to be environmentally responsible and genuinely concerned about global warming and the climate change crisis are warned that many of the schemes going around are widely open to fraud.

The Daily Planet Media has established the three flaws in carbon offset schemes that are destroying the credibility of ethical mitigation of carbon greenhouse gasses:

1. Nothing to stop a company claiming to be running a scheme which does not exist
2. No checks on claims of exaggerated carbon cuts and charging hugely inflated prices for offsetting
3. Nothing to prevent selling offsets that have already been sold

The inherent problem with carbon offsetting is that the idea hasn?t come from climate scientists but, instead, is a product of politicians and their business associates who are attempting to meet the demands for action against global warming without any fundamental economic framework for offsetting in place.

Currently there is no method for accurately measuring the emissions to be offset. The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change found a margin of error of 60% for measuring emissions with oil, gas and coal industries. And adding considerably to the problem is that there is no way of measuring the carbon saved elsewhere.

The whole concept of carbon offsetting is affected by what?s known as the ?additionality factor?. This is the evidence that is required to show that any carbon reduction being offset would not have occurred in the natural order of commercial life.

Fundamental flaws in the plethora of offsetting schemes has created a crisis in the voluntary market that is shying away from laying down the rules for effective and transparent carbon offsetting.

Many fashionable forestation projects, sponsored by rock stars and celebrities, are currently under investigation. Some have already discredited. For example, there are strong claims that customers - who thought they had paid for new trees to be planted - later found out that all they received was the right to claim ownership of carbon absorbed by trees that were already planted. Among other major concerns are that tree-planting projects, such as in Africa, have disrupted water supplies while evicting thousands of villagers from their land and also running plantations where the soil releases more carbon than is absorbed by the trees.

The only solution to the problems besetting carbon offsetting is the introduction of a worldwide regulation such as the gold standard scheme (GSS)- backed by Greenpeace and other environmental group - to ensure that emission reductions are verified, additional and consistent with sustainable development. So far the GSS has registered seven projects, two of which have produced some 350,000 tonnes of verified gold standard carbon reductions.