carbon
Newsletter
Planted mangroves capture significant carbon, study shows
A new study finds that planted mangroves can store up to 73 percent of the carbon that naturally occurring mangroves hold, based on 40 years of data.
In short:
- Planted mangroves, in 20 years, can accumulate about 73 percent of the carbon stocks of natural mangroves.
- The study analyzed 684 sites globally, offering a comprehensive look at the carbon storage potential of restored mangroves.
- Mangrove restoration is essential but must be done correctly to be effective in carbon sequestration.
Key quote:
“If it’s successful, then yes, you can get 75 percent of the carbon stocks of a natural forest. If you do it unsuccessfully, you get zero.”
— Daniel Friess, coastal scientist at Tulane University
Why this matters:
Planted mangroves could be a vital tool in combating climate change by storing significant amounts of carbon. However, restoration projects must be carefully managed to achieve their potential benefits.
Keep reading...Show less
International carbon credits lead to mangrove restoration in Senegal but raise social equity concerns
A $4.4-million carbon offset project funded by multinational companies restored mangroves in Senegal, but local workers saw minimal financial benefit despite doing much of the work.
In short:
- Restoration efforts, funded by carbon credits from European companies, helped revive Senegal's mangroves, benefiting local ecosystems and economies.
- Despite their crucial role in the project, local workers received low wages and were not informed about the origins of the funding.
- Critics argue that carbon offset projects often exploit local communities, providing little financial transparency and minimal involvement in project design.
Key quote:
"We know it’s the NGOs and their partners who are earning millions. Not us."
— Hélène Sonko, local worker
Why this matters:
Mangroves, known for their ability to sequester large amounts of carbon, provide an invaluable buffer against coastal erosion and support biodiversity. However, this ostensibly win-win situation belies a stark disparity in benefits. Despite their pivotal role in the restoration efforts, local workers have reaped minimal financial rewards. While corporate backers tout the project's environmental success, the economic uplift for the community remains disappointingly scant.
Keep reading...Show less
Newsletter
Credit: vectorwin/Big Stock Photo
Turning plant waste into carbon-sequestering bricks to combat climate change
Graphyte, a startup supported by Bill Gates, aims to fight climate change by burying carbon-sequestering bricks made from plant waste deep underground.
In short:
- Graphyte has developed a method to create carbon-sequestering bricks from plant waste, which are then buried to trap carbon dioxide.
- The company's goal is to store 50,000 tons of carbon annually, though experts question if this scale is sufficient to impact global emissions.
- The carbon removal industry faces challenges such as scalability, cost, and potential ethical concerns about diverting focus from emission reduction.
Key quote:
“I’m worried about our scale of deployment. I think we need to get serious fast.”
— Barclay Rogers, CEO of Graphyte
Why this matters:
Carbon removal technologies are important, as cutting emissions alone may not be enough to avoid catastrophic climate impacts. Innovative solutions like Graphyte’s bricks could play a significant role if they can scale effectively and economically.
Keep reading...Show less
Newsletter
Credit: TitusStaunton/Pixabay
Iowa carbon pipeline regulations challenged by Summit
Summit Carbon Solutions claims Iowa counties lack the authority to enforce ordinances restricting the siting of carbon dioxide pipelines, stating that state and federal regulators have ultimate control.
In short:
- Summit Carbon Solutions seeks to overturn county ordinances that mandate setbacks for carbon pipelines, arguing these regulations conflict with state and federal authority.
- Federal and state regulators are said to have exclusive jurisdiction over pipeline safety, according to Summit and its supporters.
- The case, involving appeals from Shelby and Story counties, will be heard by the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, with a decision expected next year.
Key quote:
“Local governments have traditionally exercised broad powers to regulate land use, including setback distances and property development that includes development in the vicinity of pipelines.”
— Alan Mayberry, pipeline safety administrator, PHMSA
Why this matters:
Summit Carbon Solutions’ stance underscores a broader trend where large energy and infrastructure firms seek to bypass local regulations, often arguing that a unified regulatory framework is essential for the development of critical projects. For this company, this means pushing forward with plans to construct extensive CO2 pipelines intended to capture and transport carbon emissions from industrial sources to underground storage sites. These pipelines are a key component of strategies aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions and mitigating climate change.
Keep reading...Show less
Newsletter
Credit: Artur Łuczka/Unsplash
BP's carbon credits questioned for lack of real climate benefit
A satellite analysis revealed that Finite Carbon, a BP-owned company, sells carbon offsets for forests that are not at risk of deforestation, raising concerns about their true climate impact.
Luke Barratt reports for SourceMaterial in partnership with Miranda Green reporting for Floodlight.
In short:
- Finite Carbon, responsible for a significant portion of U.S. carbon credits, faces criticism for selling offsets on trees unlikely to be cut down.
- Experts found that 79% of credits from key projects, valued at $334 million, should not have been issued.
- The analysis highlights systemic flaws in California’s cap-and-trade system, allowing companies to exploit offset protocols.
Key quote:
“We don’t think that the project should have been allowed to proceed and earn credits.”
— Elias Ayrey, head scientist at Renoster
Why this matters:
Carbon offsets are intended to reduce net emissions, but flawed credits undermine this goal, allowing continued pollution.
Keep reading...Show less
Nike cuts sustainability staff despite carbon goals
Nike has laid off nearly one-third of its sustainability workforce, casting doubt on its commitment to reducing its environmental impact.
Rob Davis reports for ProPublica and Matthew Kish for The Oregonian.
In short:
- Since December, Nike has reduced its sustainability team by 30%, affecting staff focused on environmental initiatives.
- The cuts come as Nike struggles to meet its carbon reduction targets, with emissions having slightly increased since 2015.
- The layoffs were part of a broader $2 billion cost-cutting plan due to flatlining sales.
Key quote:
"Given Nike’s leadership and investment, their retreat is unfortunate, especially in light of the scale and urgency of the challenge."
— Ken Pucker, professor of practice at Tufts University
Why this matters:
Reducing sustainability efforts threatens Nike's environmental goals and undermines public trust in the company's commitment to addressing climate change. This shift could impact global efforts to meet climate targets.
Keep reading...Show less
Credit: Mirko Fabian/Unsplash
Companies use carbon markets to boost pesticide sales
Farmers enrolling in climate-smart programs find themselves reliant on pesticides marketed by the same companies running these carbon markets.
In short:
- Companies like Bayer are integrating pesticide sales with carbon market platforms, potentially increasing chemical use.
- Agricultural carbon markets, originally designed to offset greenhouse gases, now often incentivize practices requiring pesticides.
- Environmental groups worry these markets prioritize sales over genuinely reducing farm chemical dependence.
Key quote:
“Get a farmer in the program, get the information, and get to sell them seeds or pest control.”
— Ben Lilliston, director of rural strategies and climate change, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy
Why this matters:
Pesticides, essential for controlling pests and ensuring crop yields, have a dark side. Their overuse can lead to a host of environmental issues, including soil degradation, water contamination, and loss of biodiversity. In addition, the production and application of these chemicals contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, potentially offsetting the reductions achieved through carbon markets.
Correction: 11 July 2024
An earlier edition of this story included Land O'Lakes among the companies integrating pesticide sales with carbon market platforms. Land O'Lakes prohibits the use of farmer data for sales and marketing targeting.
Keep reading...Show less
ORIGINAL REPORTING
MOST POPULAR
CLIMATE
