Maggie Koerth’s Post

Climate reporters need tools for investigating offsets. So do reporters who cover local politics, land management, business, and other beats that aren’t always steeped in deep climate knowledge. At CarbonPlan, we developed a tool called OffsetsDB, an open-access platform that makes it easier to find and compare data from five of the largest offset registries – more than 9,000 individual offset projects. On July 9, we’ll be leading a webinar with The Journalist's Resource that will walk reporters through the basics of how the offsets industry works and how to use OffsetsDB as a tool to aid your reporting. Research scientist Grayson Badgley and editorial lead Maggie Koerth will answer your questions and help bring some clarity to this increasingly important field. You can register here: https://lnkd.in/gixpC8PX

ChatGPT's response between two opposing climate scientists. Steven Koonin and Andrew Dessler have contrasting views on climate science, which have been discussed extensively in debates, particularly in a high-profile debate at the Soho Forum. Koonin, author of Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn't, and Why It Matters, argues that the scientific consensus on climate change does not support the level of urgency advocated by many climate scientists and policymakers. He believes climate models are often over-interpreted, making projected impacts seem more dire than they may actually be. He also contends that reducing greenhouse gas emissions rapidly is costly and may not yield significant benefits relative to adaptation strategies that leverage fossil fuels for continued economic growth. Dessler, a prominent climate scientist and professor, disputes Koonin's arguments, asserting that the warming observed since the 19th century is abnormal and that rapid decarbonization is essential to avoid severe climate impacts. He points to evidence supporting renewable energy's viability and argues that transitioning away from fossil fuels is essential for long-term sustainability. While Dessler acknowledges that renewables have challenges, he views them as necessary despite the high infrastructure costs. While Koonin critiques Dessler’s positions as lacking consideration for fossil fuel benefits and economic trade-offs, he respects Dessler as a credible scientist, although he disagrees with his urgency-driven approach to climate policy. This nuanced exchange highlights the ongoing debate within climate science about the speed and approach of climate action, balancing environmental urgency against economic feasibility and resilience measures. Bjorn Lomborg

My recent post on climate gaslighting generated some really useful discussion.  Getting the language right is challenging, and I struggled to find the right expression to capture my feelings. 'Gaslighting' is where I landed. I was also prompted to dive deep into various aspects of scientific method. It should come as no surprise that integrity is not something that can be empirically observed or measured for the purpose of experimentation.  There is no 'integrity-ometer', and 'integritium' is not on the periodic table of elements. Don't get me wrong, science is super important to climate.  All of my commercial activity is built on an evidence-based approach to delivering a safe climate. I myself, have studied science and have a deep respect for scientists.  However, science is not the arbiter of integrity.  So let's ensure we get the language right. Scientists are free to express opinions on integrity, but these are value statements and not scientific fact. Equally, when I use the term 'climate gaslighting', it is a values comment around the manipulation of data interpretation and not scientific fact. What drives me to the use of this language is looking at climate through the lens of necessary condition analysis, which has a factual basis.  For example, it is necessary for us to fast track every hectare of land being managed for drawdown, soil conservation and nature repair to deliver a safe climate. To have nature-based solutions at scale, it is necessary to have widespread landholder participation. Management change doesn't happen in a vacuum, so landholder participation is another fundamental requirement (unless the argument is that management has no impact on landscape outcomes). Given the strategic imperative of these two necessary conditions to achieving a safe climate, I am happy to argue that anything that puts doubt in the minds of landholders signing up for carbon projects, signing up to be part of the solution, signing up to do better....then yes, creating that doubt is manipulation at a systemic level.  Climate gaslighting feels like the best fit to describe this phenomenon. #climategaslighting #climateinnovation

Take a look at #TransitionArc, a comprehensive tool from Climate Arc that assesses corporate transitions and facilitates financing for global climate goals. For the first time, corporate transition analyses are consolidated in one place, eliminating the need to navigate diverse assessment frameworks and conflicting metrics. This tool will speed up the #ClimateTransition by helping decision-makers close gaps between corporate commitments, disclosures, and actions: 🟣 Companies can focus on green solutions and attract investments 🟣 Financial institutions can channel capital to support transitions 🟣 Civil society can advocate for better corporate accountability 🟣 Governments and regulators can devise policy and accountability mechanisms Access the tool here: https://brnw.ch/21wKNgJ

What does Rubicon Carbon look at when evaluating project climate impact? Broadly speaking, we look at two key areas: 1] Claim effectiveness: how well does the project deliver against its stated objectives? We use various tools, including geospatial approaches for nature-based projects and life cycle assessments.  (LCAs) based on the latest scientific literature. We also engage directly with project developers. 2] Carbon accounting: how well does the project measure, track  and report the project’s removed or avoided greenhouse gas emissions? Here, we conduct independent analyses at the project and vintage levels,  using geospatial monitoring where applicable. Here’s Amishi Kumar Claros to explain:

All carbon removal pathways share one fundamental challenge: how to best apply monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) practices to increase high-quality supply, generate greater demand and scale the carbon removal industry. Isometric's newest report “Monitoring, reporting and verifying carbon removal: Creating frameworks for scale” sets out nine key principles for addressing this challenge. It is the result of two days of discussion between the nearly 100 members of industry, policymakers and the scientific community that attended Isometric's MRV Workshop during London Climate Action Week in June 2024. If you are a buyer, supplier or policymaker committed to scaling carbon removal, read more about the nine principles of rigorous MRV to see how you can do your part: https://lnkd.in/eG4XNjd6

We know that implementing successful mitigation projects that foster sustainable development is a matter of teamwork 🤝 . And in the global landscape of the voluntary carbon market, the host countries of mitigation projects have a crucial role in this team. Together with Nicolas Kreibich, Florian Eickhold and Leonie M., we spoke with government representatives of host countries to explore the risks, benefits, challenges and the speciality of the national context when engaging in the VCM. The findings are out now.

THE CRUCIAL YEARS by Bill Mckibben ... Environmentalist, Founder of 350.org and Third Act. This is his NEWSLETTER about action on the CLIMATE front: 🐢 What Activists are doing? 🐢 What are the OIL companies doing? 🐢 What banks are doing and GOVERNMENTS etc Prolific AUTHOR  who believes it's his job to give hell to the bad guys and help to the good ones in his THE CRUCIAL YEARS newsletter...I highly recommend 🐢 https://lnkd.in/gqbsWF68. Authors I want to share POST series

🔊 NEW ::: VCM Host Country Perspective – Addressing risks and securing benefits of engaging on the voluntary carbon market ::: New Policy Paper released!   The Voluntary Carbon Market (VCM) can be an important tool for leveraging private capital to fund climate action, but its complex landscape is hard to navigate. Employing a multi-method approach that combines desktop research with insights from interviews and roundtable discussions, our new paper explores the challenges, risks, and benefits related to the VCM. It puts a particular focus on assisting governments, especially in developing countries, in their decision-making processes, highlighting the imperative for governance tailored to the unique national contexts. The findings suggest that increased transparency and collaboration among stakeholders, an improved balance between government interventions and industry-led initiatives, and financial and technical support from developed countries are needed.   Read the full report at: https://lnkd.in/eBpcxBxM   Authors: Nicolas Kreibich, Florian Eickhold, Max Schulze-Steinen & Leonie Melcher   #BMWK #Article6 #CarbonMarkets #ClimateAction

We are delighted to see Climate Arc has launched #TransitionArc - a one-stop #ClimateFinance tool to assess corporate transitions on climate goals 🌎 The global #ClimateTransition is a collaborative effort, and what companies do or don’t do matters to all of us. Accelerating corporate transition is a goal we share across the climate finance ecosystem. The climate community has worked tirelessly to improve corporate data disclosure, provide accounting frameworks and transition guidance. This collective effort has shifted companies towards greater transparency, action and accountability.    #TransitionArc has been developed to add to this positive movement, bringing together the best transition analysis available on the market - for the first time in the public domain - showing companies’ relative progress across GHG performance, climate targets, capital allocation, governance and policy engagement. This fills a key gap in the climate finance ecosystem, allowing decisions to be made more effectively, accelerating the transition we need to a safer and more sustainable world. We’re very proud to be part of this project.