DeSmog

Carbon ranching pushes rainforest preservation in global-warming battle

authordefault
on

Carbon ranching allows multinationals to compensate for pollution by paying third-world countries to preserve rainforests. Right now, it’s worth more to a logging company or a peasant to convert to stumps or soybeans than to leave the rainforest intact. With carbon ranching, a hectare of rainforest worth $200-to-$500 for crop production could increase to around $10,000 if preserved as a sponge for carbon dioxide.

Carbon ranching could also nudge the developing world into the effort to reduce emissions. A coalition of “rainforest nations” led by Papua New Guinea and Costa Rica has indicated it will participate in carbon ranching without demanding any increase in foreign aid.

Corporate polluters also like carbon ranching because conserving rainforest is often cheaper than reducing their emissions. Some, like Mitsubishi, are doing it voluntarily to be seen as supporting environmental efforts. They also anticipate that future legislation will let them get credit for it. And business support virtually guarantees the idea will get a hearing in the polluter-friendly White House.

Related Posts

on

The Conservative candidate has changed his tune on climate action, recently attacking Labour’s net zero policies and arguing for new fossil fuel extraction.

The Conservative candidate has changed his tune on climate action, recently attacking Labour’s net zero policies and arguing for new fossil fuel extraction.

Clintel’s fifth anniversary conference in town outside Amsterdam offers a glimpse of the group’s transatlantic ties.

Clintel’s fifth anniversary conference in town outside Amsterdam offers a glimpse of the group’s transatlantic ties.
on

The government is being taken to court for failing to publish the evidence provided to ministers before they backed the controversial scheme.

The government is being taken to court for failing to publish the evidence provided to ministers before they backed the controversial scheme.

Les responsables de campagne critiquent des programmes volontaires « fortement défectueux », tandis que l’analyse de DeSmog révèle l'absence de représentation de la société civile ou des communautés locales affectées par les dommages causés par l’industrie des farines et huiles de poisson.

Les responsables de campagne critiquent des programmes volontaires « fortement défectueux », tandis que l’analyse de DeSmog révèle l'absence de représentation de la société civile ou des communautés locales affectées par les dommages causés par l’industrie des farines et huiles de poisson.