The assertion in headlines, such as that below, that carbon credits will not reduce emissions (from a Wall Street Journal* article) only serves to make doubt the good work that credit programs can do.
It's the case that carbon credits are not likely to have an impact on the behavior and emissions of major emitters. This is particularly true in contrast to the earnings that result from the production of fossil fuels. It's more likely that less expensive renewable sources will, in time, have more of an effect in reducing our dependence on fossil fuels rather than taxing carbon emissions.
Today's emissions can be a challenge. However, carbon credits are important. We must move beyond the income Statement and focus on the Balance Sheet. And more specifically, our long-term carbon debt.
If Planet Earth had to maintain the Balancesheet, we included as an asset in the Asset columns, we would be listed with our essential needs , such as food security, physical security, and water availability. Also, in our Long Team debt entries , we were able to see the accumulation of greenhouse gas, the extreme quantity of organic matter in soil removal from our farms, and astonishing levels the degradation of the most efficient carbon storage zones the mangroves along our coast It will soon reveal that our present situation has nothing to do with one season's emissions.
This is the reason that I believe any headline that includes carbon offsets or emission reduction is false. The challenges we're encountering in relation to climate change is not just carbon emissions. It's also decades (centuries). Poor agricultural practices pose a serious threat as is widespread deforestation, mangrove loss and a host of other sins.
How extensive is the mangrove forest's damage? Mangrove forests that range from 50% to 65% have either disappeared completely or are severely degraded. Many areas of the world's agricultural land have lost as much as 80% of their soil carbon, which has led to the food security of our planet being in danger.
That's why we should shift our focus away from the "triple-bottom line" to the interest that is accrued on the balance sheets. Think of carbon credits more of a balance sheet adjustment item in relation to total debt, rather than a tax on today’s emissions. A(carbon) credit can be used to lower the (carbon) debt.
How can we cut down on the burden of debt?
The answer is simple. Let's look at an example. Within the CarbonNation fund family we've created the CarbonNation Blue fund which seeks to do one very simple but extremely effective thing that is to protect and restore mangroves. In order for mangrove forests to become scaled, significant funding is needed. For replanting an area of 15,000 hectares it will require between USD2,500 and USD4,500 per head. Additionally, three years of careful cultivation by local communities will be needed.
It is also necessary to offer more efficient algae-based fisheries for the nearby area so that any phosphorus and nitrogen waste can be removed and the quality of produce can be enhanced.
As the forest grows, the alga plants come online carbon credits will be generated. These are utilized to repay the principal amount and return the investment to investors. The community is also the main beneficiary of the initial stage of investment. Aside from these economic benefits, what's the upside? A greater mangrove cover will lead to a greater amount of fish. Mangroves guard fish from predators. It is one of the primary sources of income for many coastal communities.
More protection against rising tides and coastal erosion is possible with more mangroves. As most people already know mangroves have a 50x higher carbon sequestration rate than low-density forest. While Browse around this site carbon extraction machines from the atmosphere and underground storage are futuristic looking Mangroves have been doing it for millions and decades and continue to supply our bodies with food.
The fund has already received significant financial support and partnerships to fund its work. More partners are welcome to get in touch.
This article is well written and thoroughly researched. My problem is the headline, which is false and misleading. The headline is based on the article text and may have been changed or modified by the editor.