The safeguard mechanism is supposed to stop Australia’s largest polluters from emitting over a certain threshold. It’s been widely criticised for lacking teeth, and is finally under review.
Academic rigor, journalistic flair
Articles on Carbon offsets
Displaying 1 - 20 of 57 articles
Biodiversity market schemes can help – but they are not a silver bullet, and can be gamed if poorly designed.
‘Blue carbon’ habitats can store a lot of carbon – but not reliably enough to offset emissions.
New research finds nature restoration only marginally lowers global warming. This pours cold water on the idea of using carbon offsets to solve the climate crisis.
More carbon dioxide in the air doesn’t necessarily mean more growth for trees, and the increasing risk of wildfires and drought has major consequences, as an interactive map shows.
After 25 years of carbon market experiments, it’s clear climate policy should not rely on offsets.
Many see carbon markets as key to channelling billions of dollars into reducing carbon emissions and protecting forests, but they also put the well-being of communities at risk.
Plan to cut emissions quickly, use offsets sparingly and set broader goals for improving society.
The dust has settled on COP26 and one of the summit’s few achievements looks decidedly less impressive.
New research shows that universities could offset carbon by changing some of their land to woodlands and meadows.
We cannot claim that inducing others to reduce emissions gives us a moral license to emit in their place.
Yes, trees and soils can absorb and store carbon, but the carbon doesn’t stay stored forever. That’s one of the problems with how net-zero plans for the climate are being designed.
Offsetting may be controversial, but we need it to reduce emissions. Here’s how it can be done with integrity.
A growing number of countries and companies have pledged to reach net-zero emissions by 2050 or earlier. But there’s a catch – they still plan to keep emitting greenhouse gases.
The world is acting on climate change – just not effectively.
Policymakers want to pay farmers for storing carbon in soil, but there are no uniform rules yet for measuring, reporting or verifying the results. Four scholars offer some ground rules.
Emissions linger in the atmosphere for far longer than human or corporate lifespans.
I spoke to dozens of people in the industry, to find out what they do – and don’t – believe.
Companies are using these credits to offset their emissions, though many projects won’t meaningfully reduce carbon in the atmosphere.
Because pledges alone won’t achieve net zero.
Top contributors
-
Professor of Sustainability Governance, University of Technology Sydney
-
Professor, The University of Melbourne
-
Professor, Crawford School of Public Policy and Head of Energy, Institute for Climate Energy and Disaster Solutions, Australian National University
-
Foundation Professor of Horticulture and Viticulture, The University of Melbourne
-
Professor of Global Change, Queensland University of Technology
-
Associate Professor, The University of Western Australia
-
Professor of Sustainable Tourism, Griffith Institute for Tourism, Griffith University
-
Faculty of Law, The University of Western Australia
-
Research Fellow, Climate & Energy College, The University of Melbourne
-
James Martin Fellow, Oxford Martin School, Environmental Change Institute and Institute for Science Innovation and Society, University of Oxford
-
Senior Industry Fellow, RMIT University
-
Honorary Professor, University of Wollongong
-
Program Leader, Agricultural and Forest Ecosystems, CSIRO
-
Senior lecturer in Marine Ecology & Head of Blue Carbon Lab, Deakin University
-
Research Lecturer, Western Sydney University
