This is a weak interview. The issues of permanence and additionality, raised by the interviewee, miss a more fundamental point. There is no longer any capacity in the global carbon budget (~200 Gt) for the wealthy of the world to excuse their high-carbon life styles with carbon offsets in third world countries. To have any chance of limiting global heating to less than +2C, every nation on Earth must cut their emissions drastically over the next decade, and rich nations such as the U.K. must deliver net zero emissions by the mid-2030s if they are not to consume an inequitable share of the remaining carbon budget. Time and time again, the BBC’s climate and environmental correspondents have proven themselves unequal to the task of explaining climate science accurately to the public. Please, please interview an atmospheric scientist instead.
The best offset is to avoid the flight in the first place. Offsets: Do not cover the supply chain which is likely to be ten times or more of the flight. Offsets are discounted into the future so carbon is absorbed later while the positive feedbacks from that increased carbon are realised now. The cost of that flight plus offsets are an opportunity cost on making lasting cuts on emissions.
Do you know which paper she is referring to in minute 5 about "16% of projects achieving the emissions reduction they claim"? that was published last month?
This will help with what is to come. 1. find early carbon rich areas in permafrost areas. 2. Inject oxygen into soil with aerobes. This will shorten the half-life of Arctic release of Methane. Methane will become the most important GG.
Solar panels typically last 25-30 years. there is currently no national scheme or program for the collection, recycling, or re-use of decommissioned PV systems in Australia
I achieved carbon neutrality even during last year's heat wave with a solar panel as low as 2.6kW. The most effective one was a passive cooling device we sell in-house called Wind-Leader. The purpose of this device is to direct wind into the room when the outside temperature drops in the early morning or after sunset, and by cooling the house, it is possible to significantly reduce the power consumption of the air conditioner. Many people are now visiting Japan by plane, so I think it would be a good idea to purchase this as a carbon canceler for those times. Forty years ago, air conditioners were not widely used in homes even in developed countries, and we are still at the stage where we could live without using air conditioners as much as possible if we could cool our homes more effectively with wind. We also have other summer heat shielding measures available on our website, so you may find them helpful. Carbon credits have been exposed as a lie in multiple media outlets, so what's important now is for each individual to reduce their CO2 emissions. Now that solar panels have become widespread, even if you use an air conditioner during the hot daytime, the electricity consumption is offset. From now on, reducing power consumption after sunset will reduce CO2 emissions and is the only correct solution.
individuals have nothing to do with it, companies are responsible for the majority of emissions. Industrial plants burning shit 24/7, planes, rich people taking a private jet for stupidly short distances, and all the rest. To pass that problem to the individual is the same as the recycling grift the oil companies made, acting like people not using plastic straws is gonna change anything when the large companies haven't changed a thing about their processes.
@@denism8494 I don't know the details about other countries, but Japan has set a target of reducing CO2 emissions by 46% overall by 2030. The breakdown is 38% in the industrial sector, 35% in transport, but the residential sector needs to cut emissions by as much as 66%. This is the same in every country, and we really need to reduce CO2 emissions in the household sector. There is a large population of office workers, and not all factories operate 24 hours a day. Now that solar power generation has become widespread, saving electricity at night is important.
Thank you for your concern,,as,.such,it's,a, milking cow,,,it's,very efficiently manipulated;;; electric car or,any vehicle with radioactive substance does harm,thank, carbon pollution.. My regards to you.
Actually CO2 levels are about three times higher than the highest point it's been in the last 800,000 years, and it's growing extremely quickly because of emissions. January 2025 reading is 426.02 ppm, while the highest it's been in the last 800,00 years before the industrial revolution was 288.40 ppm, around 325,000 years ago.
@@GiDaOnedon't waste your time correcting people who either chose to believe stuff like this despite all the evidence, or post stuff like this out of mal-intent. down vote, report as misinformation, and move on.
Click here to subscribe to our channel 👉🏽 bbc.in/3VyyriM
This is a weak interview. The issues of permanence and additionality, raised by the interviewee, miss a more fundamental point. There is no longer any capacity in the global carbon budget (~200 Gt) for the wealthy of the world to excuse their high-carbon life styles with carbon offsets in third world countries. To have any chance of limiting global heating to less than +2C, every nation on Earth must cut their emissions drastically over the next decade, and rich nations such as the U.K. must deliver net zero emissions by the mid-2030s if they are not to consume an inequitable share of the remaining carbon budget.
Time and time again, the BBC’s climate and environmental correspondents have proven themselves unequal to the task of explaining climate science accurately to the public. Please, please interview an atmospheric scientist instead.
The best offset is to avoid the flight in the first place.
Offsets:
Do not cover the supply chain which is likely to be ten times or more of the flight.
Offsets are discounted into the future so carbon is absorbed later while the positive feedbacks from that increased carbon are realised now.
The cost of that flight plus offsets are an opportunity cost on making lasting cuts on emissions.
100% agreed
there is currently no national scheme or program for the collection, recycling, or re-use of decommissioned PV systems in Australia
Really informative
Its the same as Carbon capture and Storage (CCS) its very easy to mess with the numbers in order to keep emitting just as nornmal..
Do you know which paper she is referring to in minute 5 about "16% of projects achieving the emissions reduction they claim"? that was published last month?
This will help with what is to come. 1. find early carbon rich areas in permafrost areas. 2. Inject oxygen into soil with aerobes. This will shorten the half-life of Arctic release of Methane. Methane will become the most important GG.
Reduction or avoidance of CO2 emissions could always be achieved by increasing the relative cost. Carbon offsetting is just indirect subsidization.
Solar panels typically last 25-30 years. there is currently no national scheme or program for the collection, recycling, or re-use of decommissioned PV systems in Australia
I achieved carbon neutrality even during last year's heat wave with a solar panel as low as 2.6kW.
The most effective one was a passive cooling device we sell in-house called Wind-Leader.
The purpose of this device is to direct wind into the room when the outside temperature drops in the early morning or after sunset, and by cooling the house, it is possible to significantly reduce the power consumption of the air conditioner.
Many people are now visiting Japan by plane, so I think it would be a good idea to purchase this as a carbon canceler for those times.
Forty years ago, air conditioners were not widely used in homes even in developed countries, and we are still at the stage where we could live without using air conditioners as much as possible if we could cool our homes more effectively with wind.
We also have other summer heat shielding measures available on our website, so you may find them helpful.
Carbon credits have been exposed as a lie in multiple media outlets, so what's important now is for each individual to reduce their CO2 emissions.
Now that solar panels have become widespread, even if you use an air conditioner during the hot daytime, the electricity consumption is offset.
From now on, reducing power consumption after sunset will reduce CO2 emissions and is the only correct solution.
individuals have nothing to do with it, companies are responsible for the majority of emissions. Industrial plants burning shit 24/7, planes, rich people taking a private jet for stupidly short distances, and all the rest. To pass that problem to the individual is the same as the recycling grift the oil companies made, acting like people not using plastic straws is gonna change anything when the large companies haven't changed a thing about their processes.
@@denism8494 I don't know the details about other countries, but Japan has set a target of reducing CO2 emissions by 46% overall by 2030.
The breakdown is 38% in the industrial sector, 35% in transport, but the residential sector needs to cut emissions by as much as 66%.
This is the same in every country, and we really need to reduce CO2 emissions in the household sector.
There is a large population of office workers, and not all factories operate 24 hours a day.
Now that solar power generation has become widespread, saving electricity at night is important.
Can you provide the website? Can’t seem to find it.
💯👍👏💯👍👏💪
Receptive.
Always felt like a scam to me.
Thank you for your concern,,as,.such,it's,a, milking cow,,,it's,very efficiently manipulated;;; electric car or,any vehicle with radioactive substance does harm,thank, carbon pollution.. My regards to you.
.
Con
No, it's a complete waste of money for nothing, The climate is fine. CO2 at low ,levels of 0.04%. Carbon credits are for making money and control.
Actually CO2 levels are about three times higher than the highest point it's been in the last 800,000 years, and it's growing extremely quickly because of emissions. January 2025 reading is 426.02 ppm, while the highest it's been in the last 800,00 years before the industrial revolution was 288.40 ppm, around 325,000 years ago.
@@GiDaOnedon't waste your time correcting people who either chose to believe stuff like this despite all the evidence, or post stuff like this out of mal-intent. down vote, report as misinformation, and move on.