After almost a decade of debate, the COP29 carbon trade deal is deeply flawed

Getting started with carbon removal

The new deal, formally known as the Paris Agreement trade mechanism, is fraught with other problems. The most obvious are the details surrounding carbon removal.

Take, for example, the earlier scenario in which a coal company in Australia offsets emissions by purchasing credits from a tree planting company in Indonesia. To benefit the climate, the carbon stored in the trees must remain there as long as the emissions from the company’s burning of coal remain in the atmosphere.

But carbon storage in soils and forests is considered temporary. To be considered permanent, carbon must be stored (injected into underground rock formations).

However, the final rules agreed in Baku do not include time periods or minimum standards for ‘sustainable’ carbon storage.

Temporary removal of carbon in fossil fuel emissions from land and forests, which remain in the atmosphere for millennia. Yet governments must already fulfill their Paris commitments. The weak new rules only exacerbate this problem.

To make matters worse, Earth’s forests or soils will nearly run out in 2023 as the warming climate increases the intensity of droughts and wildfires.

This trend raises questions about systems that rely on these natural systems to capture and store carbon.