mastodon.xyz is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
A Mastodon instance, open to everyone, but mainly English and French speaking.

Administered by:

Server stats:

820
active users

#offsetting

0 posts0 participants0 posts today

The burning of #wood in power and heat stations, and the industrial use of #charcoal, are expanding rapidly worldwide, at the expense of forests (and therefore our future).

This is driven by a combination of renewable energy targets and subsidies, #coal phaseout policies that support wood #biomass as an alternative, the exemption of biomass from carbon taxes and pricing and, in parts of the global South, carbon-#offsetting schemes.

boell.de/en/2025/03/14/forest-

"How meat and milk companies are racing to ease your climate guilt."

washingtonpost.com/climate-env

WaPo finally posted a modest critique of meat industry greenwashing.

<💬>
Under another new California law, companies also must disclose the emissions created throughout their supply chains, and the Securities and Exchange Commission is working on a similar requirement.

It all has big food companies rushing to show progress in cutting emissions, particularly after so many of them promised to zero out their net release of greenhouse gases — known as going “carbon neutral” — by 2050 or earlier, in alignment with the Paris agreement on global warming. In the backdrop is a contentious debate over how those companies should calculate their carbon footprints.

The fight has shifted to an obscure independent organization called the GHG Protocol, a group made up of corporations, scientists and environmental groups that writes accounting rules for greenhouse gas emissions that will guide what climate claims companies can make under new state laws.

Among the companies involved in determining when and how farming and harvesting methods can be used to erase the emissions impact of products like hamburgers and dairy are McDonald’s, Nestlé and the Global Roundtable for Sustainable Beef, to which meat giants Tyson Foods and Cargill belong.

The deliberations of the GHG Protocol, which is managed by the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, are kept confidential. But discord spilled into public in the fall, following its publication of draft guidelines for farm and forestry emissions. Dozens of environmental groups and academics say the rules as proposed would allow companies to declare climate-unfriendly products such as lumber, paper, beef and milk carbon neutral — or even carbon negative — by making modest land use adjustments that don’t truly mitigate the emissions of those products.
</💬>

There's certainly going to be more and more tension due to these corporations trying to find better greenwashing, better methods of faking data, more sophisticated bullshit.

It's going to get a lot worse before they lose.

The Washington Post · How meat and milk companies are racing to ease your climate guiltBy Evan Halper

European parliament MEPs have voted to outlaw use of terms such as “environmentally friendly”, “natural”, “biodegradable”, “climate neutral” or “eco” without evidence, while introducing a total ban on using carbon #offsetting schemes to substantiate claims theguardian.com/environment/20

The Guardian · EU bans ‘misleading’ environmental claims that rely on offsettingBy Patrick Greenfield

The NSW biodiversity credits market

"NSW pricing watchdog recommends overhaul of biodiversity offsets scheme. Tribunal found developers were paying into fund five times faster than the Biodiversity Conservation Trust was able to find required offsets."

"The report said a submission the tribunal received from the Independent Commission Against Corruption noted “inadequate governance arrangements undermine confidence and introduce the risk of corruption”.

theguardian.com/australia-news
#NSW #transparency #PublicInformation #Offsetting #offsets #governance #biodiversity

The Guardian · NSW pricing watchdog recommends overhaul of biodiversity offsets scheme By Lisa Cox

Native forest logging ban in Tasmania could save state $72m, pro-market thinktank says

"Analysis recommends the government stop subsidising its forestry arm and generate carbon credits, a move likely to be opposed by industry and conservationists. The taxpayer should not be subsidising environmental degradation to indulge the anti-competitive, protectionist fantasies of a small number of individuals with outdated and romanticised views of an industry."

"Tasmanian environment organisations say the state should follow Victoria and Western Australia in phasing out native logging next year without allowing forests to be used to offset ongoing pollution. The Australia Institute has launched a campaign arguing “turning Australia’s forests into carbon offsets for the fossil fuel industry will only mean more pollution and more climate change”.
>>
theguardian.com/australia-news
#FossilFuels #LoggingIndustry #Offsetting #NativeForests #ClimateEmergency #biodiversityCrisis #conservation

The Guardian · Native forest logging ban in Tasmania could save state $72m, pro-market thinktank saysBy Adam Morton

Australia is at a turning point
250 years of extinctions and degradation is enough.
Every indicator on the environment is going in the wrong direction.
The environment must be given legal priority over land-clearing and logging to survive.

"The Henry review is the latest in a number reports that have found Australia’s natural environment is in peril. The five-yearly state of the environment released last year found it was in poor and deteriorating health due to pressure from climate change, habitat loss, invasive species, pollution and mining."

"Dr Ken Henry (Chair of the Australian Climate and Biodiversity Foundation) says NSW’s biodiversity laws are failing and must be overhauled to give nature protection primacy over l o g g i n g , mining and urban expansion...Australia’s environment must be given legal priority over land-clearing and logging to survive."

"He made the comments after leading a scathing review of the New South Wales Biodiversity Conservation Act, which said the laws were failing and were likely to never succeed unless they were overhauled to give n a t u r e p r o t e c t i o n primacy over development, logging, mining and urban expansion."

“Legislation that deals with rural lands and rural land-clearing, in particular, [but also] legislation that deals with planning, with f o r e s t r y , with mining – you name it, all of those other acts have p r i m a c y over the biodiversity and conservation act, and they are undermining its effectiveness..That’s the biggest problem."

"On nature, Henry’s recommendations included the creation of “no-go” zones in which land-clearing would be banned and major changes to the state’s biodiversity offset scheme, which was found to be “compromised”."

“Fix the biodiversity offset scheme, strengthen environmental protections and stop runaway land-clearing"

Replied in thread

@ZaneSelvans not quite as bad as it first sounded. At least they are accounting for the carbon credit losses due to the 2021 forest fires. And although the insurance buffer is currently big enough to cover the loses, they’re redoing their calculations and will enforce a bigger buffer in line with projections. It’s still not the answer, that’s just stop oil, but it’s something #offsetting

Continued thread

10/10 Ian Elgie knows about the #Iroko or #Mvule tree as he and the Eastbourne United Nations Association are very involved in the Mvule Tree Planting project in #Uganda. This is an #Offsetting scheme which, of course, many are rightly super sceptical of, but anyway, here the link in case you are interested. Helping to plant #Mvule trees in Uganda probably a good thing?

unaeastbourne.org/store/p2/Car

UNA EASTBOURNECarbon Offset Tree Planting50p plants a tropical hardwood tree.Plant the iconic Mvule (Iroko) tree and two companion species - small costs- big benefits.Donate £18 to plant 36 trees (or a Standing Order £1.50 per month) to be carbon neutral.The UK government calculates your carbon footprint using the 'production method'. This means that they only calculate your footprint for activities in the UK (about 6 tonnes per adult). But some half or more of your carbon footprint includes manufacturing and supply chains from overseas. Therefore, we use the 'consumption method' to calculate the average UK adult's carbon footprint (about 8-10 tonnes) for a more realistic carbon footprint. The 36 tropical hardwood trees of the Tri-species project will capture an estimated 16 tonnes of CO2 per year ( = 4.36 tonnes carbon) after allowing for an annual mortality rate.  You can purchase one or multiple lots by choosing your quantity before pressing "Buy Now". Scroll down for further details.
Replied in thread

@mrchrisadams I'd say lobbying (including strategic litigation) is a much more risky investment, as you can't guarantee results or even that outcomes will monotonically increase with increasing expenditure.

On the least worst side of #offsetting there's e.g. #Compensate Oy, can't find their advisors on the fediverse though:
compensatefoundation.org/

I'd rather buy & retire allowances from the #ETS.

Not sure how to fund refining improvements without funding the general expansion of refiners.

"Adverts claiming products are carbon neutral by using offsetting face UK ban"

Exclusive: "Advertising watchdog to begin stricter enforcement on use of terms such as ‘carbon neutral’ amid concerns over offsets..."

#GreenWashing #OffSetting #CarbonNeutral

theguardian.com/environment/20

The GuardianAdverts claiming products are carbon neutral by using offsetting face UK banBy Patrick Greenfield