In case you missed it - This week saw the release of 3 linked publications
that show how the offsetting part of California cap-&-trade program
creates 'ghost credits' that allow Chevron, PG&E, and other major emitters
to release more greenhouse gasses than our climate law would otherwise
allow.

The rules of the program let project developers game the system by
deceptively claiming that the trees on forested parcels of land are
storing more carbon and are in greater danger of being logged than is
actually the case.

ProPublica reporter Lisa Song and MIT's James explain
<https://www.propublica.org/article/the-climate-solution-actually-adding-millions-of-tons-of-co2-into-the-atmosphere>
how credits worth mega-millions have been paid to forest owners, including
tribes in California and New Mexico. They site a new scientific paper
pre-print <https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.28.441870v1> (by
Bay Area scientists Barbara Haya, Danny Cullenward, and others) and a
related web site <https://carbonplan.org/research/forest-offsets-explainer>
showing how these payouts are based cherry-picked data and lax oversight by
state regulators (CARB).

CARB, the offsetting entrepreneurs, and tribal spokespeople defend the
policy, often highlighting good things some owners have does with the funds
such as the Yurok buying back lands that were taken from them. But if our
public policy is to promote such activities, shouldn't we be supporting
them directly instead of making good forest management dependent on
allowing Chevron, etc. to continue to cook the planet?

(This was my point in the op ed I wrote
<https://calmatters.org/commentary/my-turn/2021/03/cap-and-trade-offsets-at-a-crossroads-in-californias-climate-policy/>
in CalMatters 1 month ago.)

Happy May Day!

Kathy
-- 
Kathleen McAfee
Professor, International Relations
San Francisco State University
[email protected]

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"gep-ed" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/gep-ed/CANHnacNR%2BNNEW3wMojVnmbkwaaJQ4Gm5eRJ338e5oH-iAzzsWA%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to