>>"Well, according to the regulators of these projects, these carbon savings are valid."
I don't believe it. If you're planting a tree, do you count it as the POTENTIAL carbon uptake based on what the mature size will be, or do you base it on CURRENT biomass? Likewise fashion with wetland restoration or any of these other feel-good means …
>>"Well, according to the regulators of these projects, these carbon savings are valid."
I don't believe it. If you're planting a tree, do you count it as the POTENTIAL carbon uptake based on what the mature size will be, or do you base it on CURRENT biomass? Likewise fashion with wetland restoration or any of these other feel-good means of "offsetting" which has been proven to not be accurate. Even WaPo says they're a scam:
>>"Well, according to the regulators of these projects, these carbon savings are valid."
I don't believe it. If you're planting a tree, do you count it as the POTENTIAL carbon uptake based on what the mature size will be, or do you base it on CURRENT biomass? Likewise fashion with wetland restoration or any of these other feel-good means of "offsetting" which has been proven to not be accurate. Even WaPo says they're a scam:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/travel/2023/04/17/carbon-offsets-flights-airlines/