Preserving nature, restoring soils and safeguarding biodiversity are urgent and necessary activities. However, branding them as carbon removals is harmful. We need other solutions
Carbon removals are not meant as a tool for corporate greenwashing or climate inaction. They should only be used to reduce the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The 2023 edition of the Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor (CCRM) assesses the transparency and quality of the climate strategies of 24 major global corporations. Only one …
The UN-backed ‘Carbon Removal Pioneers’ stoke the development dreams of African countries but crash against the reality of climate science.
The draft EU Carbon Removal Certification Framework is at risk of doing more harm than good to the climate and biodiversity, while encouraging climate inaction.
The European Commission’s blueprint for certifying carbon removals risks turning into a carbon loophole bonanza that will slow down the deep and sustained decarbonisation transition the EU urgently needs.
The Sharm el-Sheikh climate conference’s final deal on Article 6 opens the door to secret carbon market deals between countries with little oversight. On a positive note, a new type of carbon credit could help spell the end of offsetting, but the agreement falls far short of what is needed.
Alarm bells for the climate were set off last week by a leak of the European Commission’s proposal for a Carbon Removal Certification Framework (CRCF). The draft leaves many important questions unanswered and vital issues unaddressed, and could usher in an era of greenwashed and money-wasting carbon removals. On 30 November, the European Commission is …
Read more “EU’s Carbon Removals Certification Framework is certifiably problematic”
Carbon Market Watch, ECOS, EEB, Bellona, IATP, FERN and WWF address an open letter to the European Commission in the context of the anticipated proposal on the Carbon Removal Certification Framework (CRCF). We believe this piece of legislation can have merits and address a gap in the EU climate policy framework, but risks seriously undermining …
Regarding the two documents, “Draft recommendations (Annex 5 to the SB002 annotated agenda)” and the in-meeting working document on “Recommendations for activities involving removals under the Article 6.4 mechanism” (SB002 in-meeting working document), Carbon Market Watch would like to submit the below input. We would also like to recall our input – prior to the …
National governments in the European Union are botching their planning of carbon removals. This lack of strategic thinking and focus on false solutions threatens the climate and biodiversity, a new study reveals. To avoid this, they must develop a clear vision of what carbon removals can achieve and focus primarily on lowering emissions. While carbon …
Stay in touch and receive our monthly newsletter, campaign updates, event invites and more.
