Is that not the point of carbon offsets, at least in principle. If you emit X and sequester Y then it would be correct to consider your net emissions to be X - Y.
P.S. I don't believe it's "sequester Y", but something more like "promise we wouldn't burn Y that we also promise was otherwise definitely going to be burned". I could be off here, feel free to double check.
The news article you’ve linked seems to suggest that these scam offset companies may soon be losing their ability to sell their credits.
Carbon offset startups are booming right now, not all of them will succeed, but there are viable technologies already being scaled up. For example, Heirloom Carbon has just made front page news today with a 200 million dollar deal they signed with Microsoft.
All this is to say, I agree that there are some bad actors in the space, and it’s great that they’re being called out for it. To suggest they’re all scams is an unfair, and largely inaccurate statement.
dataflow|2 years ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37284764
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/aug/24/carbon-c...
https://www.google.com/search?q=carbon+offsets+site%3Anews.y...
P.S. I don't believe it's "sequester Y", but something more like "promise we wouldn't burn Y that we also promise was otherwise definitely going to be burned". I could be off here, feel free to double check.
Gravey|2 years ago
Carbon offset startups are booming right now, not all of them will succeed, but there are viable technologies already being scaled up. For example, Heirloom Carbon has just made front page news today with a 200 million dollar deal they signed with Microsoft.
All this is to say, I agree that there are some bad actors in the space, and it’s great that they’re being called out for it. To suggest they’re all scams is an unfair, and largely inaccurate statement.