“These carbon credits are essentially predicting whether someone will chop down a tree, and selling that prediction,” said one study author. “If you exaggerate or get it wrong, intentionally or not, you are selling hot air.”
Most carbon offset schemes significantly overestimate their impact on reducing deforestation, with many of the carbon credits purchased by polluting corporations amounting to little more than “hot air,” according to a researcher behind a study released Thursday that could portend billions of dollars in losses for speculators.
“Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD) projects are intended to decrease carbon emissions from forests to offset other carbon emissions and are often claimed as credits to be used in calculating carbon emission budgets,” explains the study, which was published in the journal Science.
However, according to the study:
We examined the effects of 26 such project sites in six countries on three continents using synthetic control methods for causal inference. We found that most projects have not significantly reduced deforestation. For projects that did, reductions were substantially lower than claimed…
Methodologies used to construct deforestation baselines for carbon offset interventions need urgent revisions to correctly attribute reduced deforestation to the projects, thus maintaining both incentives for forest conservation and the integrity of global carbon accounting.
“Carbon credits provide major polluters with some semblance of climate credentials. Yet we can see that claims of saving vast swathes of forest from the chainsaw to balance emissions are overblown,” study co-author Andreas Kontoleon, from the University of Cambridge’s Department of Land Economy, said in a statement.
“These carbon credits are essentially predicting whether someone will chop down a tree, and selling that prediction,” he added. “If you exaggerate or get it wrong, intentionally or not, you are selling hot air.”
A new analysis in Science reveals that emission reductions from forest conservation projects—sometimes used to “offset” carbon emissions from other sources—have been overestimated.
Kontoleon added that overestimations of forest preservation have driven an increase in the number of carbon credits on the market, resulting in artificial price suppression.
“Potential buyers benefit from consistently low prices created by the flood of credits,” he said. “It means that companies can tick their net-zero box at the lowest possible cost.”
This could mean that carbon speculators stand to lose billions of dollars in the future as offsets become stranded assets.
“It’s currently a buyer’s market and buyers are, rightly, prioritizing quality. There are over a billion tons of issued but not retired credits in the market—this suggests lots of credits can be written off, and there will remain a large supply for buyers to tap into,” Anton Root, head of research at AlliedOffsets, toldThe Guardian Thursday.
“A correction like that could help to orient the market toward fundamental supply-demand dynamics, which we don’t currently tend to see, and drive up the price for credits that are deemed to be above the quality threshold,” he added.
“Carbon credit speculators could lose billions as scientific evidence shows many offsets they have bought have no environmental worth and have become stranded assets.” https://t.co/gnx6fZy8yS
The new research follows other scientific research and journalistic investigations, including a January study by The Guardian, Die Zeit, and SourceMaterial that concluded that over 90% of the rainforest carbon offsets sold by Verra, the nonprofit organization that sets the world’s leading sustainability standard, “are largely worthless and could make global heating worse.”
While some scientists argue that CO2 extraction, either via natural or technological means, is needed in order to meet the goals of the Paris climate agreement, opponents call the technology a “false climate solution.”
“Carbon offset markets are widely discredited,” Food & Water Watch policy director Jim Walsh said earlier this year. “Their only benefit lies in enriching the middlemen charged with selling the lie.”
Despite this, the Biden administration is pushing ahead with a plan to invest $2.5 billion in a pair of major carbon capture and storage projects, which it claims will “significantly reduce carbon dioxide emissions from electricity generation and hard-to-abate industrial operations” as part of the “effort critical to addressing the climate crisis and meeting the president’s goal of a net-zero emissions economy by 2050.”
One recent Wednesday, while most scientists around the world were carrying out their research, we stepped away from our day jobs to engage in a more direct form of communication.
Along with more than 20 others from Scientists for Extinction Rebellion and assisted in our efforts by Doctors for Extinction Rebellion, we pasted scientific papers to the UK government’s Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS). A group of us glued ourselves to the building, and nine scientists were arrested.
This kind of action may seem extreme for a scientist, but these are no ordinary times. As most members of the UK public now recognise, addressing the climate crisis requires drastic changes across society. In 2019, the UK parliament itself declared a climate emergency – and in an emergency, one must take urgent action.
Seemingly endless academic papers and reports highlight the need for the immediate and rapid decarbonisation of the global economy if we are to avert climate change so serious that it risks the collapse of human civilisation. The International Energy Agency, a respected policy advisory body to countries around the world, warned in 2021 that “if governments are serious about the climate crisis, there can be no new investments in oil, gas and coal, from now – from this year”.
Prime Minister Boris Johnson has stated that “it is time for us to listen to the warnings of the scientists” on the climate emergency. But despite this, the UK government is choosing not to wind down the fossil fuel industry, but instead to expand it.
The government recently published its energy security strategy. However, rather than focusing on home insulation, energy efficiency and onshore wind as most experts suggest, the strategy promotes the expansion of oil and gas production.
Such measures do very little to address the pressing issues of rising fuel bills or heavy imports of Russian oil and coal. And as a self-proclaimed leader in global climate action, the UK’s doubling down on fossil fuels also sends a dangerous message to the rest of the world.
Evidence alone is easily ignored
In a choice between fossil fuels and a liveable planet, the government has chosen oil and gas. For scientists who have dedicated their lives to research, this is hard to take. Many of us do our work in the belief that, if we provide scientific information to decision-makers, they will use it to make wise decisions in the public interest.
Yet the global response to the climate crisis, despite decades of increasingly dire warnings, shows this to be naive. The reason is as simple as it is obvious: governments don’t respond to science on these matters, but to the corporate interests that invest so heavily in political donations and lobbying.
Scientists must face a difficult truth that doesn’t come easily to those of us who are most comfortable working diligently on experiments and journal articles: evidence alone, even if expertly communicated, is very easily ignored by those that do not wish to hear it.
If we are to help bring about the transition away from fossil fuels that the world so urgently needs, we are going to have to become much harder to ignore. This does not mean disregarding the evidence or abandoning our integrity: quite the opposite. We must treat the scientific warnings on the climate crisis with the seriousness that they deserve.
Become hard to ignore
History suggests that one of the most powerful ways to become hard to ignore – and one of the few options available to those who do not have deep pockets or the ear of politicians – may be through nonviolent civil disobedience, the refusal to obey certain laws in order to bring public and media attention to an unjust situation.
From universal suffrage to civil rights for people of colour and action on the Aids pandemic, many of the most progressive social changes of the 20th century were brought about in this way. Many would likely agree that such actions are morally justified in a planetary emergency.
The recent blossoming of environmental civil disobedience movements around the world, led by Extinction Rebellion and the Greta Thunberg-inspired youth strikes, has been hugely influential in changing the global conversation on climate. These movements have been linked to an unprecedented surge of public concern and awareness about the climate crisis.
The scientists arrested on that Wednesday included an expert in energy policy, an air pollution specialist, three ecologists and two psychologists, across all career stages from junior researchers to established professors. Some work on the planetary crisis itself, others on our societal responses to it, but none of us took our actions lightly.
Civil disobedience doesn’t always need a particular target to be effective, because the main objective is to ring the alarm by generating media and wider public attention. Extinction Rebellion protests, for example, has targeted fossil fuel infrastructure, media and finance institutions and airports used by private jets, in addition to the general disruption caused by roadblocks.
But we went to BEIS because, as the government department responsible for climate change, it should be leading the transition away from fossil fuels. Instead, through enabling and promoting new fossil fuel extraction, it is doing the opposite.
Recent acts of law-breaking by scientists may seem radical, but the world’s most senior diplomat disagrees. On the release of the IPCC’s latest report, the UN Secretary General António Guterres said: “Climate activists are sometimes depicted as dangerous radicals. But the truly dangerous radicals are the countries that are increasing the production of fossil fuels.”
He could not have said it more clearly: while we scientists may have been breaking the law, it is the government that’s placing us all in danger.
[A}nti-net zero think tanks, such as the Global Warming Policy Foundation and Institute for Economic Affairs, both housed at the infamous 55 Tufton Street, are known to be highly influential in shaping government policy – yet their funding sources remain largely opaque.
Until last year that is, when an investigation by openDemocracyrevealed the GWPF to have accepted money from US-based groups with interests in fossil fuels. As Bob Ward of the Grantham Institute told the Guardian following the revelations, “it is disturbing that the Global Warming Policy Foundation is acting as a channel through which American ideological groups are trying to interfere in British democracy”.
It is particularly disturbing when that influence leads to us being left behind in the transition to the post-fossil age.
As the world moves on to cheaper and better technologies, we must not allow fossil fuel-backed interests to dictate our energy and economic decisions – to do so would be to act like a newspaper board that decided not to invest in desktop computers because it was in thrall to the typewriter lobby.
I haven’t even mentioned climate change, because I haven’t needed to. In a world of rapidly evolving technology, it makes sound economic sense to move beyond the fossil fuel era and onto better, cleaner ways of powering our activity. We must not listen to the anti-green extremists trying to hold us back.
Gail Bradbrook, a co-founder of Extinction Rebellion.
As deadly temperature records are set daily, the silencing of those that would speak truth to power can be felt. And it’s chilling.
There has been a pattern in recent climate protector trials where defendants are told they don’t have a defence in law, that anything they want to say in their defence is inadmissible and irrelevant and that they can’t inform the jury of the jury’s long-established right to make decisions based on their conscience. Moreover, people are threatened with imprisonment, and sometimes even imprisoned, if they do.
The trial of Dr Gail Bradbrook
The long-postponed jury trial of Dr. Gail Bradbrook, cofounder of XR, for breaking a window at the UK’s Department for Transport – supposedly valued at £27.5k – in October 2019 [1] began sitting on Monday this week (17 July). [2]
On Tuesday Judge Martin Edmunds dismissed the jury and aborted the trial. He has now set a retrial for the week commencing 30 October, which is scheduled to last for four days instead of five. This means that the retrial is fortuitously set to take place during the fifth anniversary of the Declaration of Rebellion [3] on 31 October 2018 and Extinction Rebellion’s first major action. [4]
We are not allowed to give further details due to reporting restrictions which are now in place.
Before the trial Gail said: “I’m trying to protect the lives and the futures of my children, all the children in the world and the generations to come.”
Gail, a mother of two who holds a doctorate in molecular biophysics from the University of Manchester, potentially faces up to four years in jail if found guilty for the Department for Transport action, which aimed to get the government to take adequate and appropriate action on the climate and nature emergencies. She has pleaded not guilty to the charge of criminal damage arguing that while she did break the window, she did it as an act of conscientious protection – a concept not yet recognised in current law.
The silencing and imprisonment of climate protectors
The Conservative government’s legislative clampdown is placing severe limits on the right of protest [5] [6].
Furthermore, since February 2023, three climate protectors have been jailed for six to eight weeks – just for mentioning the words climate change or fuel poverty to a jury, when attempting to explain why they undertook their actions. [7] [8] [9]
Gail’s trial was postponed several times across four years to take account of various rulings, notably including the Colston statue case, which alongside other rulings rendered specific legal defences to be no longer valid, thus an excuse for the court systems to silence protestors. [10] [11]. There has been a pattern of jury acquittals in direct action cases, which have embarrassed the government and enraged certain sections of the press. [12]
“Juries must be allowed to have the evidence regarding current law, as well as the wider context,” added Gail. “On this basis, they may serve justice rather than power, by asserting their right to reach a verdict based on their conscience.
”It is now common in the trial of climate protectors for the judge to rule that defendants are not allowed to speak about their motivations in court, denying them the right to a fair trial, an absolute right under the Human Rights Act.”
Quotes
Actress Emma Thompson: “In the same way we honour the women who broke windows to gain the vote, so we will honour the people who break windows in order to gain real action in the face of deadly climate collapse.
“People who risk losing their freedom for the sake of other humans and for the protection of all future generations are not criminals but heroes.”
Cathy Eastburn, a supporter of XR, Just Stop Oil and Insulate Britain, who has spent time in prison as a result of her nonviolent direct action to sound the alarm and instigate action on climate change: “Juries regularly acquit protectorsif we are able to explain our motivations and the context for our actions. The government and the courts have responded by eroding trial by jury – a highly valued central tenet of our legal system – by stealth. We are being silenced and no longer have the right to defend ourselves, nor to a fair trial. And if we stand up for ourselves against the dictates of the court, we are sent to jail.”
Kofi Mawuli Klu, Co-vice-chair, Pan-Afrikan Reparations Coalition in Europe: “The former colonies look up to the UK’s justice system regarding it as the gold standard. These ‘show trials’ of climate protectors are permanently damaging the reputation of the UK in the majority world. The UK must practise what it preaches, and preserve the right to a fair trial – as well as deliver on its climate change commitments.”
Gail Bradbrook and Extinction Rebellion
Gail Bradbrook co-founded Extinction Rebellion in 2018 after a period of research, preparation and network building.
A mother of two teenage boys, she holds a doctorate in molecular biophysics from the University of Manchester, alongside several prizes and awards for her undergraduate degree, including the Royal Society of Chemistry’s best chemist award and a Wellcome Scholarship. She was named by GQ as one of the most influential people in Britain and honoured in the BBC Woman’s Hour Power List 2020: Our Planet – celebrating UK women making a significant contribution to the health and sustainability of the environment.
After XR’s first rebellion in April 2019, the UK parliament declared a Climate and Environment Emergency, but the government has subsequently failed to act with the necessary urgency. The government is now making things worse by licensing new oil, coal and gas developments that are incompatible with a 1.5C world [13] [14]. XR is now a global movement using nonviolent civil disobedience to put pressure on institutions to act on the climate and nature emergencies. In April this year, XR UK joined forces with over 200 organisations to bring 100,000 people together outside the UK’s parliament across four days to demand an end to the fossil fuel era, implement emergency citizens assemblies and reparations. [15]
[4] 15 environmental protesters arrested at civil disobedience campaign in London https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/31/15-environmental-protesters-arrested-at-civil-disobedience-campaign-in-london
Extinction Rebellion (XR) is a decentralised, international and politically non-partisan movement using non-violent direct action and civil disobedience to persuade governments to act justly on the Climate and Ecological Emergency.
Donate | Support our work What Emergency? | Read about the true scale of the climate crisisAs deadly temperature records are set daily, the silencing of those that would speak truth to power can be felt. And it’s chilling. There has been a pattern in recent climate protector trials where defendants are told they don’t have a defence in law, that anything they want to say in their defence is inadmissible and irrelevant and that they can’t inform the jury of the jury’s long-established right to make decisions based on their conscience. Moreover, people are threatened with imprisonment, and sometimes even imprisoned, if they do. The trial of Dr Gail Bradbrook The long-postponed jury trial of Dr. Gail Bradbrook, cofounder of XR, for breaking a window at the UK’s Department for Transport – supposedly valued at £27.5k – in October 2019 [1] began sitting on Monday this week (17 July). [2] On Tuesday Judge Martin Edmunds dismissed the jury and aborted the trial. He has now set a retrial for the week commencing 30 October, which is scheduled to last for four days instead of five. This means that the retrial is fortuitously set to take place during the fifth anniversary of the Declaration of Rebellion [3] on 31 October 2018 and Extinction Rebellion’s first major action. [4] We are not allowed to give further details due to reporting restrictions which are now in place. Before the trial Gail said: “I’m trying to protect the lives and the futures of my children, all the children in the world and the generations to come.” Gail, a mother of two who holds a doctorate in molecular biophysics from the University of Manchester, potentially faces up to four years in jail if found guilty for the Department for Transport action, which aimed to get the government to take adequate and appropriate action on the climate and nature emergencies. She has pleaded not guilty to the charge of criminal damage arguing that while she did break the window, she did it as an act of conscientious protection – a concept not yet recognised in current law. The silencing and imprisonment of climate protectors The Conservative government’s legislative clampdown is placing severe limits on the right of protest [5] [6]. Furthermore, since February 2023, three climate protectors have been jailed for six to eight weeks – just for mentioning the words climate change or fuel poverty to a jury, when attempting to explain why they undertook their actions. [7] [8] [9] Gail’s trial was postponed several times across four years to take account of various rulings, notably including the Colston statue case, which alongside other rulings rendered specific legal defences to be no longer valid, thus an excuse for the court systems to silence protestors. [10] [11]. There has been a pattern of jury acquittals in direct action cases, which have embarrassed the government and enraged certain sections of the press. [12] “Juries must be allowed to have the evidence regarding current law, as well as the wider context,” added Gail. “On this basis, they may serve justice rather than power, by asserting their right to reach a verdict based on their conscience. ”It is now common in the trial of climate protectors for the judge to rule that defendants are not allowed to speak about their motivations in court, denying them the right to a fair trial, an absolute right under the Human Rights Act.” Quotes Actress Emma Thompson: “In the same way we honour the women who broke windows to gain the vote, so we will honour the people who break windows in order to gain real action in the face of deadly climate collapse. “People who risk losing their freedom for the sake of other humans and for the protection of all future generations are not criminals but heroes.” Cathy Eastburn, a supporter of XR, Just Stop Oil and Insulate Britain, who has spent time in prison as a result of her nonviolent direct action to sound the alarm and instigate action on climate change: “Juries regularly acquit protectors if we are able to explain our motivations and the context for our actions. The government and the courts have responded by eroding trial by jury – a highly valued central tenet of our legal system – by stealth. We are being silenced and no longer have the right to defend ourselves, nor to a fair trial. And if we stand up for ourselves against the dictates of the court, we are sent to jail.” Kofi Mawuli Klu, Co-vice-chair, Pan-Afrikan Reparations Coalition in Europe: “The former colonies look up to the UK’s justice system regarding it as the gold standard. These ‘show trials’ of climate protectors are permanently damaging the reputation of the UK in the majority world. The UK must practise what it preaches, and preserve the right to a fair trial – as well as deliver on its climate change commitments.” Gail Bradbrook and Extinction Rebellion Gail Bradbrook co-founded Extinction Rebellion in 2018 after a period of research, preparation and network building. A mother of two teenage boys, she holds a doctorate in molecular biophysics from the University of Manchester, alongside several prizes and awards for her undergraduate degree, including the Royal Society of Chemistry’s best chemist award and a Wellcome Scholarship. She was named by GQ as one of the most influential people in Britain and honoured in the BBC Woman’s Hour Power List 2020: Our Planet – celebrating UK women making a significant contribution to the health and sustainability of the environment. After XR’s first rebellion in April 2019, the UK parliament declared a Climate and Environment Emergency, but the government has subsequently failed to act with the necessary urgency. The government is now making things worse by licensing new oil, coal and gas developments that are incompatible with a 1.5C world [13] [14]. XR is now a global movement using nonviolent civil disobedience to put pressure on institutions to act on the climate and nature emergencies. In April this year, XR UK joined forces with over 200 organisations to bring 100,000 people together outside the UK’s parliament across four days to demand an end to the fossil fuel era, implement emergency citizens assemblies and reparations. [15] Notes for editors: [1] Extinction Rebellion disrupt UKs Department for Transport – where is the plan to meet a net zero target and halt biodiversity loss? https://extinctionrebellion.uk/2019/10/15/extinction-rebellion-disrupt-uks-department-for-transport-where-is-the-plan-to-meet-a-net-zero-target-and-halt-biodiversity-loss/ [2] Extinction Rebellion protestor ‘caused £27,000 worth of damage to government building’ https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jul/17/extinction-rebellion-protester-27000-damage-government-building [3] Declaration of Rebellion, Extinction Rebellion 2018 https://extinctionrebellion.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/XR-A3-declaration-V1.pdf [4] 15 environmental protesters arrested at civil disobedience campaign in London https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/31/15-environmental-protesters-arrested-at-civil-disobedience-campaign-in-london [5] UN rights chief urges UK to reverse ‘troubling’ Public Order Bill https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/un-rights-chief-urges-uk-reverse-troubling-public-order-bill-2023-04-27/ [6] Liberty launches legal action against home secretary for overriding parliament on protest powers https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/issue/liberty-launches-legal-action-against-home-secretary-for-overriding-parliament-on-protest-powers/ [7] Insulate Britain activist jailed for eight weeks for contempt of court https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/feb/07/insulate-britain-activist-david-nixon-jailed-for-eight-weeks-for-contempt-of-court [8] Activists jailed for seven weeks for defying ban on mentioning climate crisis https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/activists-jailed-for-seven-weeks-for-defying-ban-on-mentioning-climate-crisis/ [9] Protesters must be allowed to explain motives in court https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/protesters-must-be-allowed-to-explain-motives-in-court-zhpg2g3gs [10] Extinction Rebellion co-founder’s trial delayed by Colston review https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-bristol-61154538 [11] Extinction Rebellion protester to face trial after Court of Appeal ruling https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-64044348 [12] The Stealth Undermining of Trial by Jury https://planb.earth/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/The-Stealth-Undermining-of-Trial-by-Jury.pdf [13] New fossil fuels ‘incompatible’ with 1.5C goal, comprehensive analysis finds https://www.carbonbrief.org/new-fossil-fuels-incompatible-with-1-5c-goal-comprehensive-analysis-finds/ [14] Lord Deben backs Labour’s plan to halt new North Sea oil and gas drilling https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jun/06/lord-deben-backs-labours-plan-to-halt-new-north-sea-oil-and-gas-drilling [15] The Big One: Our Collective Demand https://extinctionrebellion.uk/the-big-one/collective-demand/ About Extinction Rebellion Extinction Rebellion (XR) is a decentralised, international and politically non-partisan movement using non-violent direct action and civil disobedience to persuade governments to act justly on the Climate and Ecological Emergency. Donate | Support our work What Emergency? | Read about the true scale of the climate crisis XR UK Local Groups | View a map of all local groups XR UK website | Find out more about XRUK XR Global website | Discover what’s going on in XR around the globe! Time has almost entirely run out to address the climate and ecological crisis which is upon us, including the sixth mass species extinction, global pollution, and increasingly rapid climate change. If urgent and radical action isn’t taken, we’re heading towards 4˚C warming, leading to societal collapse and mass loss of life. The younger generation, racially marginalised communities and the Global South are on the front-line. No-one will escape the devastating impacts. XR UK Local Groups | View a map of all local groups XR UK website | Find out more about XRUK XR Global website | Discover what’s going on in XR around the globe!
Time has almost entirely run out to address the climate and ecological crisis which is upon us, including the sixth mass species extinction, global pollution, and increasingly rapid climate change. If urgent and radical action isn’t taken, we’re heading towards 4˚C warming, leading to societal collapse and mass loss of life. The younger generation, racially marginalised communities and the Global South are on the front-line. No-one will escape the devastating impacts.
Gail Bradbrook could face a custodial sentence if convicted.
Gail Bradbrook, a co-founder of Extinction Rebellion, went on trial in west London on Monday for breaking a window at the Department of Transport in October, 2019.
Bradbrook has previously pleaded not guilty to a charge of criminal damage for using a hammer and woodworking tool to crack the building’s glass frontage, which the prosecution valued at £27,500.
Bradbrook could face a prison sentence if convicted. Judges can also impose community service and fines.
Extinction Rebellion emerged in 2018, aiming to use civil disobedience to force governments to take rapid action to prevent climate breakdown and ecosystem collapse.
The group has since mobilised protests in the UK and around the world, including in April this year, when it linked up with other environmental and social justice organisations to mobilise tens of thousands of people in central London.
The trial at Isleworth Crown Court is due to conclude on Friday.
