In your opinion, are so-called "carbon credits" consisting of some corporation taking a specific patch of natural forest cover, including, for example, a patch of natural Amazon Rainforest, for an additional ton of CO2 emissions, an effective instrument for real reduction of CO2 emissions into the atmosphere?
To consider the question of the role of so-called "carbon credits" in the context of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, one would have to assume that such a system actually reliably works. However, from what is reported by independent journalists, environmentalists, people who care about protecting the climate, biosphere and biodiversity of the planet's natural ecosystems, including the forests of the Amazon, even those declared patches of natural Amazon Rainforest taken for protection under the so-called carbon credits are nevertheless often cut down.
Perhaps something will finally begin to change, to improve, in terms of protecting the climate, biosphere and biodiversity of the natural ecosystems of the Amazon Rainforest in connection with the first Amazon Forest Conservation Summit in 14 years, currently being held in Belém, Brazil. Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon fell by 60 percent in July compared to the same month last year. The announcement of the positive trend coincides with the start of a summit in Belém of the 8 countries whose territories include the Amazon forest. This summit is attended by representatives of the governments of the 8 countries whose territory includes the natural Amazon Forest. Perhaps plans and commitments will be made to realistically protect this largest terrestrial reservoir of natural biodiversity and natural forests characterized by a particularly high contribution to absorbing CO2 from the atmosphere and producing oxygen. It may also be that the processes of increasing the scale of protection of these forests and reducing their still large-scale logging will be accelerated so that by 2030 at the latest, the deforestation of these forests will be completely ended. This is a particularly important issue because more than 20 percent of the Amazon rainforest has already disappeared due to human activity.
In view of the above, I address the following question to the esteemed community of scientists and researchers:
In your opinion, are the so-called carbon credits, which consist in the fact that some corporation, for an additional ton of CO2 emissions, will take under protection a certain patch of natural forest cover, including, for example, a patch of natural Amazon Rainforest, an effective instrument for real reduction of CO2 emissions into the atmosphere?
Are so-called carbon credits an effective instrument to realistically reduce CO2 emissions into the atmosphere?
What do you think about this topic?
What is your opinion on this issue?
Please answer,
I invite everyone to join the discussion,
Thank you very much,
Best regards,
Dariusz Prokopowicz
Counting on your opinions, on getting to know your personal opinion, on a fair approach to the discussion of scientific issues, I deliberately used the phrase "in your opinion" in the question.
The above text is entirely my own work written by me on the basis of my research.
In writing this text I did not use other sources or automatic text generation systems.
Copyright by Dariusz Prokopowicz
Carbon credits are a market-based mechanism designed to incentivize the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, including CO2, by assigning a financial value to each unit of reduced emissions. They work by allowing companies, organizations, or individuals to buy and sell credits, where one credit typically represents the reduction of one metric ton of CO2 or its equivalent in other greenhouse gases. These credits can be generated through activities that reduce emissions, such as renewable energy projects, afforestation, energy efficiency initiatives, and more.
The effectiveness of carbon credits in achieving real reductions in CO2 emissions depends on several factors:
In conclusion, carbon credits can be an effective instrument for real CO2 emission reductions if they are implemented and managed carefully. They can provide financial incentives for emissions reduction projects and contribute to a broader climate mitigation strategy. However, their effectiveness relies on accurate measurement, robust verification mechanisms, clear regulations, and a commitment to genuine emissions reductions beyond what would have occurred naturally.
See: https://www.developmentaid.org/news-stream/post/164948/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-carbon-credits-eo
"Examination of 420,000 years old ice cores shows a close relation between temperature increase and CO2-concentration increase. During the industrial era a new energy component appears, Anthropogenic Heat Flux, and a part of that energy will accumulate in Earth climate system and become an essential part of global warming;" One could suppose that this idea, expressed in this simplicity, would be common sense! However, it is, neither more nor less than the abstract of the article "Anthropogenic Heat Flux Will Affect Global Warming" by Mats Lindgren, from the KTH "Royal Institute of Technology Stockholm", published in "Atmospheric and Climate Sciences, Vol .11 No.3, July 2021"
Available on:
Article Anthropogenic Heat Flux Will Affect Global Warming
See also
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Adaptation_and_Resilience_to_Climate_Change_Temporal_Paradox_versus_Chronology_Protection_Conjecture/26
On deforestation and Atmospheric CO2. "A study of effects of terrestrial biota on the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere suggests that the global net release of carbon due to forest clearing between 1860 and 1980 was between 135 × 1015 and 228 × 1015 grams. Between 1.8 × 1015 and 4.7 × 1015 grams of carbon were released in 1980, of which nearly 80 percent was due to deforestation, principally in the tropics. The annual release of carbon from the biota and soils exceeded the release from fossil fuels until about 1960. Because the biotic release has been and remains much larger than is commonly assumed, the airborne fraction, usually considered to be about 50 percent of the release from fossil fuels, was probably between 22 and 43 percent of the total carbon released in 1980. The increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is thought by some to be increasing the storage of carbon in the earth's remaining forests sufficiently to offset the release from deforestation. The interpretation of the evidence presented here suggests no such effect; deforestation appears to be the dominant biotic effect on atmospheric carbon dioxide. If deforestation increases in proportion to population, the biotic release of carbon will reach 9 × 1015 grams per year before forests are exhausted early in the next century. The possibilities for limiting the accumulation of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere through reduction in use of fossil fuels and through management of forests may be greater than is commonly assumed".
In Italics is the abstract of the well-cited old paper:
Woodwell, G. M., Hobbie, J. E., Houghton, R. A., Melillo, J. M., Moore, B., Peterson, B. J., & Shaver, G. R. (1983). Global deforestation: contribution to atmospheric carbon dioxide. Science, 222(4628), 1081-1086.
Comment: It is IMHO a Scientific Heresy when tackling the GHE issue and Carbon reduction or sequestration before suitably addressing the challenging question of the Forest Future, at the global scale, with the world engagement it deserves using among other means the polluter-payer principle to restore Forest Coverage around the world.
Illustration Maps: Virgin Forest in the U.S. From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deforestation_in_the_United_States
See also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Adaptation_and_Resilience_to_Climate_Change_Temporal_Paradox_versus_Chronology_Protection_Conjecture
Carbon credits do NOT reduce emissions. Theoretical emissions reductions are negated by the new/increased emissions/existing from other source.
Gustav's post of 6 wordy points is obfuscation (aka BS) filling space before the typical unjustified boiler-plate conclusion
"...carbon credits can be an effective instrument for real CO2 emission reductions IF......
IF they could be - but they're not.
The research [1] by Wang et al. 2022, "Three Gorges Dam: friend or foe of riverine greenhouse gases?" puts into insight some prejudices about large Hydraulic infrastructure. The related findings should imply further deepening of the scientific community knowledge. "These findings suggest that ‘large-dam effects’ are far beyond our previous understanding spatiotemporally, which highlights the fundamental importance of whole-system budgeting of GHGs under the profound impacts of huge dams". The question remains what comprehensive environmental impacts of such huge changes in hydrologic systems on all the components of the earth system as well as on associated modification of population activities (agriculture, industries, production...). Then what would be the impacts of these changes on the different budgets of GHE, water cycle, and other exchanges at the interfaces of the earth system?
[1] Ni, J., Wang, H., Ma, T., Huang, R., Ciais, P., Li, Z., ... & Borthwick, A. G. (2022). Three Gorges Dam: friend or foe of riverine greenhouse gases?. National Science Review, 9(6), nwac013.
See Also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Climate_Change_Water_Resources
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Adaptation_and_Resilience_to_Climate_Change_Temporal_Paradox_versus_Chronology_Protection_Conjecture
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Water_Footprint_Water_Colors_Blue_Water_Green_Water_Grey_Water_Virtual_Water
Cop28. The Guardian, Dec 13, 2023, by Fiona Harveyin, After 30 years of waiting, Cop28 deal addresses the elephant in the room. He was personally vilified, but Sultan Al Jaber has managed what no other Cop presidency has ever done. Dubai. "As temperatures broke records around the world this summer, António Guterres, the UN secretary general, warned in September: “Humanity has opened the gates of hell.” On Wednesday, he hailed delegates at the Cop28 climate summit in Dubai, as two weeks of fraught talks ended. “For the first time, the outcome recognises the need to transition away from fossil fuels,” he said. “The era of fossil fuels must end, and it must end with justice and equity.”
More than 190 nations accepted a text on Wednesday morning that calls on the world to “transition away” from fossil fuels. But is this a historic deal that will spell the eventual end of gas, oil and coal? Or will it be one more step on the road to hell? In the world of climate talks, these two are not mutually exclusive. The text that was gavelled on Wednesday morning, known as the “global stocktake”, enjoins countries for the first time to embark on a de facto phase-out of fossil fuels. But it cannot require them to do so and it contains “a litany of loopholes”, according to the small island states that are most vulnerable to the impacts of the climate crisis, that will hamper the world from cutting greenhouse gas emissions drastically enough to limit global heating to 1.5C (2.7F) above pre-industrial levels.
The Cop28 president, Sultan Al Jaber, the United Arab Emirates host of the conference, hailed the adoption of the key text on Wednesday morning, and called it the “UAE consensus”. A consensus, but not quite unanimity: Samoa spoke for small island states at the final meeting to say they would not block the deal, but warned that the world was still far off track from the 1.5C limit, and this outcome was not enough to correct that course.
As they and other developing countries pointed out, there are plenty of problems with this deal. Poor nations still need hundreds of billions more in finance, to help them make the transition away from coal, oil and gas. Developed countries and oil producers will not be forced to move as fast as climate science urges..."
Read on:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/dec/13/cop28-deal-significant-progress-tackle-climate-crisis
See Also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Energy_Renewable_Energy_and_Levelized_Cost_Of_Energy_LCOE_Paradoxes
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Adaptation_and_Resilience_to_Climate_Change_Temporal_Paradox_versus_Chronology_Protection_Conjecture
Jamel Chahed
Thanks. This validates COP's as complete and total BS shops. A meaningless commitment without definition, force or date certain. China and oil producing states did not enlist.
Some compare it to the Kellogg-Briand pack to outlaw war.
This is a pretty telling sign that these COP's are useless confabs of the self indulgent, pompous elite - John Kerry as their poster child.
Hughes, D. M. (2017). Energy without conscience: oil, climate change, and complicity. Duke University Press. Available on: https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/45673/3/625276.pdf
Presentation: 'In Energy without Conscience' David McDermott Hughes investigates why climate change has yet to be seen as a moral issue. He examines the forces that render the use of fossil fuels ordinary and therefore exempt from ethical evaluation. Hughes centers his analysis on Trinidad and Tobago, which is the world's oldest petro-state, having drilled the first continuously producing oil well in 1866. Marrying historical research with interviews with Trinidadian petroleum scientists, policymakers, technicians, and managers, he draws parallels between Trinidad's eighteenth- and nineteenth-century slave labor energy economy and its contemporary oil industry. Hughes shows how both forms of energy rely upon a complicity that absolves producers and consumers from acknowledging the immoral nature of each. He passionately argues that like slavery, producing oil is a moral choice and that oil is at its most dangerous when it is accepted as an ordinary part of everyday life.
See Also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Science_Conscience
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Energy_Renewable_Energy_and_Levelized_Cost_Of_Energy_LCOE_Paradoxes
https://www.researchgate.net/post/The_energy_pattern_and_the_perspective_of_large-scale_exploitation_of_shale_gas_What_alternative_solutions
Iceland volcano erupts on Reykjanes peninsula (BBC, 4 hours ago). Volcanic eruptions, always Fascinating in Beauty and Majesty, remind us in a spectacular way of essential factors in the heat balance of the globe: the transfers at the Visible Lithosphere-Atmosphere Interface in the form of Seismic and Volcanic Activities and the transfers at the Lithosphere-Hydrosphere interface, Invisible because they occur at the bottom of the oceans. Unlike the GHE, the effects of these activities on Climate Change are not well analyzed, at least in Climate Models, including those used in IPCC projections.
Illustration Source: ICELANDIC MET OFFICE:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-67756413
See Also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Adaptation_and_Resilience_to_Climate_Change_Temporal_Paradox_versus_Chronology_Protection_Conjecture
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Climate_Change_and_Climate_Models_Progress_and_LimitsArticle Predictability of water resources with global climate models...
Several publications indicate that Coal exploitation and Trade is a sector with substantial opportunity for corruption, especially as it expands into new International Markets. The paper by Setyawati D., 2022, "Injustice and environmental harm in extractive industries and solar energy policies in Indonesia. International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy. 11(1): 14-27" is, as such, instructive. One may read there: "...the persistent enthusiasm for coal energy and the ambitious deployment of renewable energy may have led to injustices in the energy system , short-sighted corrupt practices, and environmental harm...". The author arrives at a more general conclusion: he demonstrates "how the marginalization of rural communities and production of environmental harm has been perpetuated by powerful figures, reinforced since colonialism, and escalated by the demands of the Global North..."
Read on:
https://20.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/journals/IntJlCrimJustSocDem/2022/3.html
See Also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Energy_Renewable_Energy_and_Levelized_Cost_Of_Energy_LCOE_Paradoxes
In these festive days, I would like to mention this 30 year old Paper, "Joy A. Palmer (1993) From Santa Claus to sustainability: emerging understanding of concepts and issues in environmental science, International Journal of Science Education, 15:5 , 487-495", in which the author discusses the nature and development of children's early knowledge and awareness of environmental issues. as strange as it may seem, we learn that "pre‐school children may well have a strong base of accurate scientific knowledge upon which early years environmental teaching may build." Happy Holidays For All
See Also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Adaptation_and_Resilience_to_Climate_Change_Temporal_Paradox_versus_Chronology_Protection_Conjecture
Phil Geis That's all you found to say: Bravo! what an insightful mind!
The study by Li et al. [1] (released 10 days ago) "Energy transition paradox: Solar and wind growth can hinder decarbonization" is based on a climate-hydrology-economics-energy model to analyze the long-run impacts of policy-driven renewables on the electricity price and finally on the carbon emissions of future energy. A remarkable finding of the research is to show that without intervention, the lower electricity price could result in a 42 % reduction in hydropower investments by 2050. With increased intermittent renewables and decreased investments in hydropower, the energy system is expected to deploy more backup fossil-fuel options, which could increase carbon emissions by 45 %. Therefore, deploying more renewable energy would depress the investments in hydropower plants and further hinder decarbonization unexpectedly, suggesting a possible paradox in the energy transition. This possible paradox calls for a new, and robust policy to ensure the benefits of decarbonization are realized regardless of potential changes electricity prices.
[1] Li, X., Liu, P., Feng, M., Jordaan, S. M., Cheng, L., Ming, B., ... & Liu, W. (2024). Energy transition paradox: Solar and wind growth can hinder decarbonization. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 192, 114220.
See :
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S136403212301078X
See Also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Adaptation_and_Resilience_to_Climate_Change_Temporal_Paradox_versus_Chronology_Protection_Conjecture
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Energy_Renewable_Energy_and_Levelized_Cost_Of_Energy_LCOE_Paradoxes
Happy New Year
Phil Geis This is all that you found to say: It is paradoxical that the "Scholar" you are does not take the trouble to read recent publications, opposes scientific information dissemination, and insists on posting stupid remarks. What a pity!
".. While most existing works evaluate methane emissions released by well fracking, completion and operation, the greenhouse footprint of unproductive shale gas wells has received little scrutiny. A large fraction of these emissions from abandoned shale gas wells are due to the diffusive transport of methane trapped in nanoporous shale matrix, which is poorly understood.." Excerpt from the paper:
Yang, Y., Liu, S., & Ma, H. (2023). Impact of unrecovered shale gas reserve on methane emissions from abandoned shale gas wells. Science of The Total Environment, 169750. (Released 2 days ago)
Illustration from the Paper
See Also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/The_energy_pattern_and_the_perspective_of_large-scale_exploitation_of_shale_gas_What_alternative_solutions
Times Leader, Jan. 6, 2023, by Greg Kozera, In a world filled with war, it is time to find ways to peace. "...We need to find a way to end the conflicts... It is expensive to fight a war... In the USA it is taxpayers who pay bill. Some countries like Russia and Iran have state run oil companies who produce revenue... The price of oil is set globally by supply and demand. Oil prices have been climbing since 2019 when world oil price was in the $40 per barrel range and we paid $1.99 per gallon for our gasoline. When world oil price was in the $90 range we saw $4+ gasoline prices. Currently oil is in the $70s per barrel. Prices vary by state due to gasoline taxes. At $40 per barrel oil companies in the USA lose money. Break even price varies by company and location. The OPEC countries and Russia don’t have the regulations U.S. companies have. When oil went to $90 per barrel, what did Russia do with all of the extra revenue? Build schools, hospitals and parks? Did they use the excess revenue to finance the war in Ukraine?
Iran’s revenue comes primarily from oil. According to their oil minister, Javad Owja, on November 3,2023, Iran was producing 3.4 million barrels of oil a day. Could Iran be using the excess profit of $78 oil to fund Hamas?
According to the EIA, in 2022 the world produced 81 million barrels of oil per day from 98 countries. The top five oil producing countries producing 52% of the world’s oil are; the USA No. 1, Saudi Arabia No. 2, Russia No. 3, Canada No. 4 and Iraq No. 5. If the USA produces a little more oil it would lower world oil prices helping U.S. consumers and reducing the amount of money countries like Russia and Iran have to spend on war...
China has a dynamic manufacturing economy. They can build their own weapons. They can also generate revenue from manufacturing supported by U.S. consumers to support wars in Ukraine, the Middle East or Taiwan, if they choose. I haven’t seen any studies about the serious impact of wars on global emissions. COP 28 chose not to address the issue and focused on reduced fossil fuel use. Restricting U.S. oil production would raise oil prices helping Russia and OPEC generate more money for war and environmental damage... If we want peace bad enough we can find ways to work together toward a common goal. Let peace begin with each of us. All things are possible.
Read on:
https://www.timesleaderonline.com/opinion/columns/2024/01/in-a-world-filled-with-war-it-is-time-to-find-ways-to-peace/
About the author.
Greg Kozera is the director of marketing and sales for Shale Crescent USA, He is a professional speaker and author of four books and numerous published articles.
See Also:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Energy_Renewable_Energy_and_Levelized_Cost_Of_Energy_LCOE_Paradoxes
https://www.researchgate.net/post/The_energy_pattern_and_the_perspective_of_large-scale_exploitation_of_shale_gas_What_alternative_solutions
On the efficiency of Capturing CO2. According to Kennedy et al. (2021)* "Capturing CO2, whether via post-combustion or Allam cycle, was determined to be less economical than venting to the atmosphere in a traditional Carbon capture, natural gas combined cycle (NGCC)... However, if tax incentives for capturing CO2 were to increase, the Allam cycle process could become more economically favorable". Thus all will depend on our willingness to pay which at the same time raises questions related to the opportunity, efficiency, and other technical and economic considerations of CO2 capture and sequestration in comparison with other solutions, in particular those of natural CO2 capture by photosynthesis and what it results in terms of environmental policies to combat desertification, deforestation, and support for reforestation, development of natural spaces, etc..." Excerpts from:
*Kennedy, Eric W., et al. "Carbon Capture by Allam Power Cycle: A Comparative Analysis." CHEMICAL & ENGINEERING NEWS 99.45 (2021)
The description of Complex Multivariable Dynamic Systems using Two-by-Two (or more) Isolate Parameters' Correlations can only be Incomplete; so that it can't produce irrefutable scientific assertions. In this regard, The well-known (1535 citations) old paper [1] by Trenberth (1990) shows that climate analyses can be compromised by measurement, data coverage, or analysis uncertainties. One may read within the text "...Most presentations of climate change focus on the surface variables of importance to man, in particular temperature and precipitation. But in order to understand why the changes occur the way they do, it is essential to consider the atmospheric dynamics, as well as the local physical processes operating to induce change. The atmospheric circulation forms the main link between regional changes in wind, temperature, precipitation, and other climatic variables, and there is likely to be a reasonably strong relationship between these even on monthly or longer time scales. Physical and dynamical consistency between changes of several climate variables can add confidence to results for a single variable which might otherwise be compromised by measurement, data coverage, or analysis uncertainties..."
[1] Trenberth, K. E. (1990). Recent observed interdecadal climate changes in the Northern Hemisphere. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 71(7), 988-993.
Available on:
https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/bams/71/7/1520-0477_1990_071_0988_roicci_2_0_co_2.xml?tab_body=pdf
This paper, tries to answer the following question: is it possible to predict Water Resources only with GCMs, without downscaling, and what would be the resulting uncertainties? "Besbes M., Chahed J. "Predictability of water resources with global climate models. Case of Northern Tunisia", Published online: 12 June 2023, Les Comptes Rendus. Géoscience". Available on:
Article Predictability of water resources with global climate models...
Abstract: The objective of the research is to explore the predictability of water resources directly with GCMs by analysing long-term effects of climate change on Northern Tunisia’s blue and green water. Hydrologic impacts rely on a rainfall-runoff lumped model using outputs of CMIP6 GCMs within the framework of the ssp2-45 scenario. Among the 30 CMIP6 models, the composite cnrm-esm2-1 and fgoals-g3 best restore observed runoff from 1995 to 2014 and give the best GCM. Hydrologic projections 2015–2100 show significant drops in rainfall (9%), runoff (21%), groundwater recharge (15%), as well as for green water (6%). The results show that the use of raw GCMs predictions on large basins is possible and provides precisions comparable to what is produced when using Regional Climate Models in medium size basins.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Social Psychology
- Attitude