carbonparadox.org

How wonderful that we have met with a paradox. 

Now we have some hope of making progress. (Niels Bohr)

Category: Project Paradoxes

  • Day 16: Control Paradox

    —

    in ,

    This is one of the shortest but most tricky paradoxes.  Yes or no, should you fully control how the money is spent on the ground when you buy carbon credits from a project? If your answer is “no,” you risk criticism for allowing potential misuse of funds due to lack of oversight.  If your answer…

  • Day 15: Standards Paradox

    —

    in ,

    Yesterday, we discussed a paradox around methodologies and science. Today’s paradox deals with the Standards.  Everyone agrees: Quality and integrity are key for carbon credits. Not surprisingly, there is an increasing demand for enhanced scrutiny, quality ratings, and additional levels of certification.  But here is a twist: Stricter certifications, reviews, ratings and audits increase costs,…

  • Day 14: Science Paradox

    —

    in ,

    Today’s paradox focuses on a question that has haunted carbon markets since their inception: We all want “scientifically proven” results. The problem is, science evolves. Science isn’t about absolutes. It’s about a preponderance of the evidence and concurrence of experts, especially when you have social sciences layered on top of physical sciences, as is the…

  • Day 13: Avoidance Paradox

    —

    in

    There are two main ways to tackle greenhouse gasses. One is to remove them from the atmosphere–by, say, planting new trees–and the other is to prevent them from getting there in the first place–by, say, replacing coal-fired power plants with wind farms or saving endangered forests.  To fight climate change, we obviously need both: Removal…

  • Day 11: Leakage Paradox

    —

    in ,

    Today, we talk about unintended consequences of well-intended investments – the “spillover effect”.  Imagine you buy a forest or a logging concession to protect the trees instead of cutting them.  Great, right? But here’s the catch: the company that sold you the land might now cut down a different forest to meet the same demand…

  • Day 8: Ambitions Paradox

    —

    in ,

    Today’s paradox is for climate policy fans. It concerns the role of carbon credits within the Paris Agreement. The Paris Agreement mandates governments to increase their emission reduction ambitions consistently. At the same time, Article 6 encourages “voluntary cooperation in the implementation of their nationally determined contributions to allow for higher ambition in their mitigation…

  • Day 7: Additionality Paradox

    —

    in

    A full week has passed, and we haven’t discussed additionality yet. Today, we need to catch up.  A project can only earn carbon credits if considered “additional.” This means that carbon finance made the project possible (although that doesn’t necessarily mean it paid for every element of the project).  Carbon finance can de-risk speculative investments…

  • Day 5: Communities Paradox

    —

    in

    Today, we focus on one of the most sensitive topics around carbon credits.  Local and Indigenous communities play a crucial role as guardians of the landscape and the forests. They are the people on the front lines of the deforestation challenge and often the stewards of sustainable land management. Aligning with the priorities and following…

  • Day 1: Baseline Paradox

    —

    in

    We start with a paradox that has puzzled forest advocates from the start: You can only earn carbon credits from forestry projects if you restore degraded trees or protect threatened ones. This means you can’t earn credits unless there has been deforestation in the past – or there is a clear threat of deforestation now. …