Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Accept Deny

GoGreenNation news

Carnival cruise line emitted more CO2 in 2023 than Scotland’s biggest city – report

News Feed
Monday, November 25, 2024

The world’s largest cruise line company is responsible for producing more carbon dioxide in Europe than the city of Glasgow, a report has found.Analysis by the Transport and Environment (T&E) campaign group, provided to the Guardian, found Carnival to be the most climate-polluting cruise company sailing in Europe in 2023.The data covered all Europe-bound cruise ships last year, including 53 that belonged to Carnival. The second most climate-polluting cruise company in Europe was MSC, followed by Norwegian Cruise Line, the group found.Carbon emissions for Carnival’s Europe-bound ships totalled 2.55m tonnes last year. The latest emissions figures for the city of Glasgow, from 2021, with a population of 620,700, were 2.43m tonnes, according to the city council. MSC emitted 1.4m tonnes and Norwegian 0.84m tonnes of CO2. Analysts from T&E used official data on carbon emissions supplied by vessels sailing in the European Economic Area, as required by EU law.“The larger companies have more vessels and bigger ships,” said Jacob Armstrong, shipping policy manager at T&E. “But bigger isn’t better when it comes to emissions.”Cruising is one of tourism’s fastest-growing sectors. The number of cruise vessels has grown significantly, from 21 in the 1970s to 515 today, and T&E research shows the world’s biggest cruise ships have doubled in size since 2000.Carnival Corporation plc, a Miami-based British and US company, made $1.95bn (£1.54bn) profit in 2023, after losses of $4.4bn and $7.1bn in 2022 and 2021, during the Covid pandemic. In 2023, 12.5 million passengers travelled on its 92 ships.Scrubber systems being installed on an Aida cruise ship. Photograph: Martin Feller/Carnival GroupIn a separate ranking of environmental harm by cruise companies in 2024, by Friends of the Earth (FoE) US, Carnival and its subsidiaries also emerged lowest among 21 cruise lines.An annual “cruise ship report card” awarded five of Carnival’s nine lines – Costa Cruises, P&O Cruises, Carnival Cruise Line, Cunard and Seabourn – the grade of F overall. Four factors taken into account were air pollution reduction, sewage treatment, water quality and transparency.Marcie Keever, ocean and vessels programme director at FoE, said Carnival’s continued use of “scrubbers” in its fleet, which, while approved by the International Maritime Organization, allows the use of dirtier fuel and causes water pollution.“Scrubbers allow ships to convert their air pollution into toxic water pollution, and they can use bunker fuel which is dirty and cheap,” she said. This factor, along with a lack of transparency, and not all ships being equipped for shore power, resulted in the F grade, the lowest ranking.FoE awarded expedition cruise lines Hurtigruten and Hurtigruten Expeditions a B+, the highest score, while Disney Cruise line got a B. Hurtigruten vessels plug into shore power instead of running their engines, thus reducing air pollution at shore power-enabled ports. Neither Hurtigruten nor Disney use scrubbers on vessels, and all three were awarded A for transparency.“There are more cruise companies getting higher grades than in previous years, so we are seeing some progress,” Keever said.A Carnival Corp and plc spokesperson said: “We’ve invested hundreds of millions of dollars in environmental technologies and solutions, which together with our other decisive climate actions are yielding strong results.”Carnival Pride docks in the port of Cobh, Ireland. Photograph: denbaim/ShutterstockCarnival’s 2023 total greenhouse gas emissions were 9.65m tonnes, compared with 10.9m tonnes in 2011.The spokesperson said it was on track to cut its emissions per passenger-equivalent by 40% by 2026, compared with 2008 levels.An MSC cruise spokesperson said improving the environmental performance of its fleet was of “crucial importance”. “We have already made significant progress, and our ships are 40% more efficient than they were 10 years ago.”A spokesperson for Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings said: “We are proud of the progress we are making towards our goal of reducing greenhouse gas intensity per capacity day by 10% by 2026 and 25% by 2030, using a 2019 baseline.”

World’s largest cruise line named Europe’s most climate-polluting, despite investing millions in cleaner technologiesThe world’s largest cruise line company is responsible for producing more carbon dioxide in Europe than the city of Glasgow, a report has found.Analysis by the Transport and Environment (T&E) campaign group, provided to the Guardian, found Carnival to be the most climate-polluting cruise company sailing in Europe in 2023. Continue reading...

The world’s largest cruise line company is responsible for producing more carbon dioxide in Europe than the city of Glasgow, a report has found.

Analysis by the Transport and Environment (T&E) campaign group, provided to the Guardian, found Carnival to be the most climate-polluting cruise company sailing in Europe in 2023.

The data covered all Europe-bound cruise ships last year, including 53 that belonged to Carnival. The second most climate-polluting cruise company in Europe was MSC, followed by Norwegian Cruise Line, the group found.

Carbon emissions for Carnival’s Europe-bound ships totalled 2.55m tonnes last year. The latest emissions figures for the city of Glasgow, from 2021, with a population of 620,700, were 2.43m tonnes, according to the city council. MSC emitted 1.4m tonnes and Norwegian 0.84m tonnes of CO2. Analysts from T&E used official data on carbon emissions supplied by vessels sailing in the European Economic Area, as required by EU law.

“The larger companies have more vessels and bigger ships,” said Jacob Armstrong, shipping policy manager at T&E. “But bigger isn’t better when it comes to emissions.”

Cruising is one of tourism’s fastest-growing sectors. The number of cruise vessels has grown significantly, from 21 in the 1970s to 515 today, and T&E research shows the world’s biggest cruise ships have doubled in size since 2000.

Carnival Corporation plc, a Miami-based British and US company, made $1.95bn (£1.54bn) profit in 2023, after losses of $4.4bn and $7.1bn in 2022 and 2021, during the Covid pandemic. In 2023, 12.5 million passengers travelled on its 92 ships.

Scrubber systems being installed on an Aida cruise ship. Photograph: Martin Feller/Carnival Group

In a separate ranking of environmental harm by cruise companies in 2024, by Friends of the Earth (FoE) US, Carnival and its subsidiaries also emerged lowest among 21 cruise lines.

An annual “cruise ship report card” awarded five of Carnival’s nine lines – Costa Cruises, P&O Cruises, Carnival Cruise Line, Cunard and Seabourn – the grade of F overall. Four factors taken into account were air pollution reduction, sewage treatment, water quality and transparency.

Marcie Keever, ocean and vessels programme director at FoE, said Carnival’s continued use of “scrubbers” in its fleet, which, while approved by the International Maritime Organization, allows the use of dirtier fuel and causes water pollution.

“Scrubbers allow ships to convert their air pollution into toxic water pollution, and they can use bunker fuel which is dirty and cheap,” she said. This factor, along with a lack of transparency, and not all ships being equipped for shore power, resulted in the F grade, the lowest ranking.

FoE awarded expedition cruise lines Hurtigruten and Hurtigruten Expeditions a B+, the highest score, while Disney Cruise line got a B. Hurtigruten vessels plug into shore power instead of running their engines, thus reducing air pollution at shore power-enabled ports. Neither Hurtigruten nor Disney use scrubbers on vessels, and all three were awarded A for transparency.

“There are more cruise companies getting higher grades than in previous years, so we are seeing some progress,” Keever said.

A Carnival Corp and plc spokesperson said: “We’ve invested hundreds of millions of dollars in environmental technologies and solutions, which together with our other decisive climate actions are yielding strong results.”

Carnival Pride docks in the port of Cobh, Ireland. Photograph: denbaim/Shutterstock

Carnival’s 2023 total greenhouse gas emissions were 9.65m tonnes, compared with 10.9m tonnes in 2011.

The spokesperson said it was on track to cut its emissions per passenger-equivalent by 40% by 2026, compared with 2008 levels.

An MSC cruise spokesperson said improving the environmental performance of its fleet was of “crucial importance”. “We have already made significant progress, and our ships are 40% more efficient than they were 10 years ago.”

A spokesperson for Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings said: “We are proud of the progress we are making towards our goal of reducing greenhouse gas intensity per capacity day by 10% by 2026 and 25% by 2030, using a 2019 baseline.”

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

After nearly 10 years of debate, COP29’s carbon trading deal is seriously flawed

The new system may essentially give countries and companies permission to keep polluting.

Negotiators at the COP29 climate conference in Baku have struck a landmark agreement on rules governing the global trade of carbon credits, bringing to a close almost a decade of debate over the controversial scheme. The deal paves the way for a system in which countries or companies buy credits for removing or avoiding greenhouse gas emissions elsewhere in the world, then count the reductions as part of their own climate efforts. Some have argued the agreement provides crucial certainty to countries and companies trying to reach net-zero through carbon trading, and will harness billions of dollars for environmental projects. However, the rules contain several serious flaws that years of debate have failed to fix. It means the system may essentially give countries and companies permissions to keep polluting. What is carbon offsetting? Carbon trading is a system where countries, companies or other entities buy or sell “credits”, or permits, that allow the buyer to offset the greenhouse gas emissions they produce. For example, an energy company in Australia that produces carbon emissions by burning coal may, in theory, offset their impact by buying credits from a company in Indonesia that removes carbon by planting trees. Other carbon removal activities include renewable energy projects, and projects that retain vegetation rather than cutting it down. Carbon trading was a controversial part of the global Paris climate deal clinched in 2015. The relevant part of the deal is known as “Article 6”. It sets the rules for a global carbon market, supervised by the United Nations, which would be open to companies as well as countries. Article 6 also includes trade of carbon credits directly between countries, which has begun operating even while rules were still being finalised. Rules for carbon trading are notoriously complex and difficult to negotiate. But they are important to ensure a scheme reduces greenhouse gas emissions in reality, not just on paper. A long history of debate Over the past few years, annual COP meetings made some progress on advancing the carbon trading rules. For example, COP26 in Glasgow, held in 2021, established an independent supervisory body. It was also tasked with other responsibilities such as recommending standards for carbon removal and methods to guide the issuing, reporting and monitoring of carbon credits. But the recommendations were rejected at COP meetings in 2022 and 2023 because many countries viewed them as weak and lacking a scientific basis. At a meeting in October this year, the supervisory body published its recommendations as “internal standards” and so bypassed the COP approval process. At this year’s COP in Baku, the Azerbaijani hosts rushed through adoption of the standards on day one, prompting claims proper process had not been followed For the remaining two weeks of the conference, negotiators worked to further develop the rules. A final decision was adopted over the weekend, but has attracted criticism. For example, the Climate Land Ambition and Rights Alliance says the rules risk “double counting” – which means two carbon credits are issued for only one unit of emissions reduction. It also claims the rules fail to prevent harm to communities – which can occur when, say, Indigenous Peoples are prevented from accessing land where tree-planting or other carbon-storage projects are occurring. Getting to grips with carbon removal The new agreement, known formally as the Paris Agreement Trading Mechanism, is fraught with other problems. Most obvious is the detail around carbon removals. Take, for example, the earlier scenario of a coal-burning company in Australia offsetting emissions by buying credits from a tree-planting company in Indonesia. For the climate to benefit, the carbon stored in the trees should remain there for as long as the emissions produced when the coal was burnt remain in the atmosphere. But, carbon storage in soils and forests is considered temporary. To be considered permanent, carbon must be stored geologically (injected into underground rock formations). The final rules agreed to at Baku, however, fail to stipulate the time periods or minimum standards for “durable” carbon storage. Temporary carbon removal into land and forests should not be used to offset fossil fuel emissions, which stay in the atmosphere for millennia. Yet governments are already over-relying on such methods to achieve their Paris commitments. The weak new rules only exacerbate this problem. To make matters worse, in 2023, almost no carbon was absorbed by Earth’s forests or soils, because the warming climate increased the intensity of drought and wildfires. This trend raises questions about schemes that depend on these natural systems to capture and store carbon. Temporary carbon removal into land and forests should not be used to offset fossil fuel emissions. Shutterstock What next? Countries already can, and do, trade carbon credits under the Paris Agreement. Centralised trading will occur under the new scheme once the United Nations sets up a registry, expected next year. Under the new scheme, Australia should rule out buying credits for land-based offsets (such as in forests and soil) to compensate for long-lasting emissions from the energy and industry sectors. Australia should also revise its national carbon trading scheme along the same lines. We could also set a precedent by establishing a framework that treats carbon removals as a complement — not a substitute — for emissions reduction, including clear boundaries on how and when carbon removals are used. Kate Dooley receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Climate
Energy
Forests

Here's What to Know About the New Funding Deal That Countries Agreed to at UN Climate Talks

In the wee hours Sunday at the United Nations climate talks, countries from around the world reached an agreement on how rich countries can cough up the funds to support poor countries in the face of climate change

It's a far-from-perfect arrangement, with many parties still deeply unsatisfied but some hopeful that the deal will be a step in the right direction. World Resources Institute president and CEO Ani Dasgupta called it “an important down payment toward a safer, more equitable future,” but added that the poorest and most vulnerable nations are “rightfully disappointed that wealthier countries didn’t put more money on the table when billions of people’s lives are at stake.”The summit was supposed to end on Friday evening but negotiations spiraled on through early Sunday. With countries on opposite ends of a massive chasm, tensions ran high as delegations tried to close the gap in expectations.Here's how they got there: What was the finance deal agreed at climate talks? Rich countries have agreed to pool together at least $300 billion a year by 2035. It’s not near the full amount of $1.3 trillion that developing countries were asking for, and that experts said was needed. But delegations more optimistic about the agreement said this deal is headed in the right direction, with hopes that more money flows in the future.The text included a call for all parties to work together using “all public and private sources” to get closer to the $1.3 trillion per year goal by 2035. That means also pushing for international mega-banks, funded by taxpayer dollars, to help foot the bill. And it means, hopefully, that companies and private investors will follow suit on channeling cash toward climate action.The agreement is also a critical step toward helping countries on the receiving end create more ambitious targets to limit or cut emissions of heat-trapping gases that are due early next year. It’s part of the plan to keep cutting pollution with new targets every five years, which the world agreed to at the U.N. talks in Paris in 2015.The Paris agreement set the system of regular ratcheting up climate fighting ambition as away to keep warming under 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels. The world is already at 1.3 degrees Celsius (2.3 degrees Fahrenheit) and carbon emissions keep rising. What will the money be spent on? The deal decided in Baku replaces a previous agreement from 15 years ago that charged rich nations $100 billion a year to help the developing world with climate finance. The new number has similar aims: it will go toward the developing world's long laundry list of to-dos to prepare for a warming world and keep it from getting hotter. That includes paying for the transition to clean energy and away from fossil fuels. Countries need funds to build up the infrastructure needed to deploy technologies like wind and solar power on a large scale.Communities hard-hit by extreme weather also want money to adapt and prepare for events like floods, typhoons and fires. Funds could go toward improving farming practices to make them more resilient to weather extremes, to building houses differently with storms in mind, to helping people move from the hardest-hit areas and to help leaders improve emergency plans and aid in the wake of disasters.The Philippines, for example, has been hammered by six major storms in less than a month, bringing to millions of people howling wind, massive storm surges and catastrophic damage to residences, infrastructure and farmland. “Family farmers need to be financed," said Esther Penunia of the Asian Farmers Association. She described how many have already had to deal with millions of dollars of storm damage, some of which includes trees that won't again bear fruit for months or years, or animals that die, wiping out a main source of income.“If you think of a rice farmer who depends on his or her one hectare farm, rice land, ducks, chickens, vegetables, and it was inundated, there was nothing to harvest,” she said. Why was it so hard to get a deal? Election results around the world that herald a change in climate leadership, a few key players with motive to stall the talks and a disorganized host country all led to a final crunch that left few happy with a flawed compromise.The ending of COP29 is "reflective of the harder geopolitical terrain the world finds itself in,” said Li Shuo of the Asia Society. He cited Trump's recent victory in the US — with his promises to pull the country out of the Paris Agreement — as one reason why the relationship between China and the EU will be more consequential for global climate politics moving forward.Developing nations also faced some difficulties agreeing in the final hours, with one Latin American delegation member saying that their group didn't feel properly consulted when small island states had last-minute meetings to try to break through to a deal. Negotiators from across the developing world took different tacks on the deal until they finally agreed to compromise. Meanwhile, activists ramped up the pressure: many urged negotiators to stay strong and asserted that no deal would be better than a bad deal. But ultimately the desire for a deal won out.Some also pointed to the host country as a reason for the struggle. Mohamed Adow, director of climate and energy think tank Power Shift Africa, said Friday that “this COP presidency is one of the worst in recent memory,” calling it “one of the most poorly led and chaotic COP meetings ever.”The presidency said in a statement, “Every hour of the day, we have pulled people together. Every inch of the way, we have pushed for the highest common denominator. We have faced geopolitical headwinds and made every effort to be an honest broker for all sides.”Shuo retains hope that the opportunities offered by a green economy “make inaction self-defeating” for countries around the world, regardless of their stance on the decision. But it remains to be seen whether the UN talks can deliver more ambition next year.In the meantime, “this COP process needs to recover from Baku,” Shuo said.Associated Press reporters Seth Borenstein and Sibi Arasu contributed to this report.The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Sept. 2024

Climate
Activism
Energy

Laser-based lidar tech is rewriting history — if climate change doesn't erase it first

Multiple ancient cities have been discovered recently thanks to lidar. But time is running out for some sites

Tashbulak and Tugunbulak may be largely forgotten today, but the pair of Uzbekistani cities thrived during the Medieval era. Nestled in the Tien Shan mountains, the largest east to west mountain range on Earth, merchants from all over Europe and Asia would travel to Tashbulak and Tugunbulak to hawk their wares. Located on the famous Silk Road, Tashbulak and Tugunbulak was a nexus of trade and culture. More than a thousand years have passed since their heyday, however, and as humans continue to destroy our environment, archaeological treasures like those in these cities could be lost forever. But thanks to a powerful laser-based technology called lidar, ancient history is being illuminated like never before. Scientists still debate whether lidar stands for “laser imaging, detection and ranging” or “light detection and ranging.” Either acronym accurately summarizes the technology, which uses lasers to measure large areas by targeting a surface or object and measuring how long it takes for light to be reflected back.But no one is debating how lidar is helping preserve humanity’s most important treasures from our species’ tendency to destroy our natural environment. "All of the storytelling takes time, and time is critical right now." As for the lost cities of Tashbulak and Tugunbulak, anthropologist Michael Frachetti used lidar to conduct unprecedentedly detailed scans of the Medieval metropolis, which thrived approximately 2,000 meters above sea level between the 6th and 11th centuries. Their research was published in October in the journal Nature, with Frachetti marveling at how these ancient cities struggled with the same self-destructive habit of exploiting their natural resources. “There does appear to be an environmental factor which played a role in both the establishment of the cities in high altitude — in this case areas rich in ore and other resources,” Frachetti said. “We hypothesize that the investment these populations made in producing iron metallurgy would have had significant environmental impact on local forest resources used for fuel. This remains to be demonstrated scientifically, but given the scale of smelting documented at Tugunbulak, it makes sense that there would have been consequential effects on the ecology of this highland landscape.” Frachetti, who teaches at Washington University in St. Louis, added that “we think there is a broader lesson related to the impact of intensive exploitation of the environment and the ultimate sustainability of Urban settings, which we can extrapolate from this time in history.” Lidar image of La Mojana Raised Fields in Colombia (Courtesy of NV5)Ron Chapple agrees that lidar keeps reminding us about the importance of environmental protection. Chapple is the former CEO of GEO1, a company that specialized in utilizing lidar technology. He was an early investor in lidar technology, recognizing during his former career as an aerial cinematographer that it has the potential to transform archaeology. He regularly is consulted by scholars about how to use lidar, and today Chapple is VP Global Strategic Solutions at NV5, a multinational corporation that also specializes in lidar, imaging and analytics. He is particularly well-known for acquiring extremely detailed images of a lost city half a world away from Uzbekistan — Ciudad Perdida (literally Spanish for "lost city"), an ancient city in Colombia’s Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta mountains. Ciudad Perdida is believed to have been founded about 800 A.D., which is true would make it older than Machu Picchu by more than six centuries. Archaeologists dream of discovering more locations like Ciudad Perdida, and yet Chapple has watched with anxiety as human activity endangers these delicate sites. Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon's weekly newsletter Lab Notes. Indeed, last week a 1,100-year-old pyramid in Mexico collapsed into a pile of rubble because of heavy rainfall that was preceded by record-breaking drought that evaporated entire lakes. Tariakuiri Alvarez, a living member of the P'urhépecha tribe, told Live Science his ancestors would have interpreted the crumbling of the pyramid at Ihuatzio as a "bad omen." Salon spoke with Chapple about the future of lidar and how, because of climate change, he believes humanity needs to start using lidar as much as possible to protect our civilization’s greatest treasures before they are lost forever. This interview has been edited for clarity and length. What do we know for sure about climate change and its impact on the future of archeology? What about other human activities such as warfare or various forms of industrial, agricultural and other commercial development? I think it's safe to assume that climate change is going to change current human living patterns in a few different ways. For example, if the world is getting a little bit warmer where crops would say grow at a 2,000-foot elevation, now that it's warmer, the farmers might need to go upslope to 3,000-foot elevation and start clear-cutting areas so their crops can continue to grow. By clear cutting, you have the potential to damage untouched areas where there could be sites of archeological significance. "During the helicopter flight, we could see clear-cutting occurring within a couple of miles of the site that we were surveying." I think that's one of the main ones, as well as any similar type of development where there are more people moving on Earth, or if there is warfare, any human influence has the potential to expose untouched areas. If we can use lidar and survey those areas in advance, we not only may be able to preserve and record any evidence of ancient settlements, but that data could assist in better land planning. Likewise with sea level rise. Increasing ocean heights may cause migration from the coast to higher ground. Again, you're opening or removing forests with farming and development that could affect archeological sites. How does lidar offer a solution to these? We were doing archeological discovery in the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta mountains in northern Colombia. During the helicopter flight, we could see clear-cutting occurring within a couple of miles of the site that we were surveying and in roughly similar terrain. Now we have no way of knowing if there was anything of historical value there or not, but it has the potential of modifying the land so that we may never know what history could have been hidden under the rainforest. Lidar image of Ciudad Perdida (Courtesy of NV5)How much of the data that your company has accumulated over the years can be realistically analyzed by qualified historians, anthropologists and other scholars who can actually transform it into meaningful stories and history? NV5 doesn’t deliver just numbers. NV5 believes in democratizing data, and we use algorithms that say, for archeologists, will highlight the contours of the ground. This visualization makes it easier for researchers to be able to look at that data and understand what they're looking at. In many cases, we are layering that data with other information such as imagery from either airplanes or satellites to provide more context. Aerial View of Ciudad Perdida (Courtesy of NV5)How do you tell a story with that data? How do you make that data easy to understand? All of the storytelling takes time, and time is critical right now. We analyze and learn what's out there. I think of Chris Fisher, an archeologist friend of mine who discovered ancient settlements in Honduras using lidar technology. Chris always says, “Is the Amazon natural,  or are we looking at an overgrown garden? In the 1500s, something like 90% of the population in South America was wiped out because of disease that came in when the Europeans settled and started to explore. For example, in 1520, when [Hernán] Cortés arrived in the densely populated Mexican city of Tenochtitlan, his soldiers brought along smallpox, which killed off 40% of the population in a single year. It harkens back to COVID-19 in an extreme sense. The more we learn about these civilizations that are now beneath the dense jungle canopy, the more we may be able to learn about our future. I'm thinking of the recent discoveries in Brazil and Uzbekistan using lidar. As I'm sure you saw, a research team in the Brazilian state of Rondônia discovered an 18th century Portuguese colonial city. In Uzbekistan, a different research team provided great detail about a pair of 6th to 11th century cities on the Silk Road, Tashbulak and Tugunbulak, that had thrived before being lost to time. What are your thoughts about the significance of these individual discoveries and how the average news consumer should internalize them in terms of their larger relevance? Is there something out there that's going to change our civilization dramatically? Maybe not today, because we have better ways to fight disease, but knowing what was out there is essential. Is it possible that some of the world’s greatest cities are still lying hidden beneath the Amazon rainforest, or in other undiscovered areas around our world? While I am not a doomsayer, with a catastrophic meteor or nuclear event, large swaths of civilization could be changed forever. What’s interesting to me about working with NV5 is that we provide data and analytics that will provide the tools for humanity to manage climate change and population growth. But back to archeology, we need to understand what was there before it's too late and provide the history that our fellow humans and children deserve. Read more about ancient history

Climate
Culture
Health

Cop29’s new carbon market rules offer hope after scandal and deadlock

Countries agree on how to create, trade and register credits to meet climate commitmentsIt was once among the most promising ways to funnel climate finance to vulnerable communities and nature conservation. The trading of carbon credits, each equal to a tonne of CO2 that has been reduced or removed from the atmosphere, was meant to target quick, cost-effective wins on climate and biodiversity. In 2022, demand soared as companies made environmental commitments using offsets, with the market surpassing $2bn (£1.6bn) while experiencing exponential growth. But the excitement did not last.Two years later, many carbon markets organisations are clinging on for survival, with several firms losing millions of dollars a year and cutting jobs. Scandals about environmentally worthless credits, an FBI charge against a leading project developer for a $100m fraud, and a lack of clarity about where money from offsets went has caused their market value to plunge by more than half. Predictions that standing rainforests and other carbon-rich ecosystems would become multibillion-dollar assets have not yet come to pass. Continue reading...

It was once among the most promising ways to funnel climate finance to vulnerable communities and nature conservation. The trading of carbon credits, each equal to a tonne of CO2 that has been reduced or removed from the atmosphere, was meant to target quick, cost-effective wins on climate and biodiversity. In 2022, demand soared as companies made environmental commitments using offsets, with the market surpassing $2bn (£1.6bn) while experiencing exponential growth. But the excitement did not last.Two years later, many carbon markets organisations are clinging on for survival, with several firms losing millions of dollars a year and cutting jobs. Scandals about environmentally worthless credits, an FBI charge against a leading project developer for a $100m fraud, and a lack of clarity about where money from offsets went has caused their market value to plunge by more than half. Predictions that standing rainforests and other carbon-rich ecosystems would become multibillion-dollar assets have not yet come to pass.But at Cop29 over the past two weeks, governments have given the sector fresh hope by signing off rules that will create an international carbon trading system for countries to meet their Paris commitments.In Azerbaijan on Saturday evening, governments agreed to rules on how countries can create, trade and register emission reductions and removals as carbon credits after years of deadlock on article 6 of the Paris agreement. It paves the way for top emitters such as Germany and Japan to buy cheap removals and reductions from decarbonisation schemes in developing countries such as renewable energy schemes, rainforest protection or tree-planting, counting them towards their own targets. Trading could begin as soon as 2025 once technical bodies have agreed on the finer details.If it works well, the market would fund the low-hanging fruit of climate mitigation while making sure emissions are capped in line with the Paris agreement. There is particularly strong interest in carbon removal, with many large tech firms buying credits and trying to scale up the market. After several false starts, negotiators and observers say this is the last chance to get it right.“International carbon markets have crashed twice in two decades. This was due to an erosion of credibility. At Baku, the operationalisation of international carbon trading under Paris can prevent a third meltdown that could be fatal,” said Axel Michaelowa, a carbon markets expert at the University of Zurich. “They are a powerful tool to accelerate the diffusion of low-carbon technology around the world. The Paris carbon market is now ready to roll out in 2025. It can accelerate mitigation and thus help close the gaping emissions gap that separates us from achieving the 1.5C target,” he said.Big concerns about carbon markets remain. In the run-up to Cop28 in Dubai last year, it emerged that vast tracts of African forest had been sold off in a series of huge carbon offsetting deals to a little-known UAE firm overseen by a member of Dubai’s royal family, prompting fears of a “new scramble for Africa” over the continent’s carbon resources.The potential size and impact of any country-level market is also unclear. Norway has reserved up to $740m (£590) for purchases under the Paris carbon market, signing agreements in Baku with Benin, Jordan, Senegal and Zambia, but there are questions over how many other developed countries will make purchases despite predictions it could soar into a multibillion-dollar market.Then, there is the issue of environmental integrity, which has repeatedly undermined faith in carbon credits, including the previous UN carbon trading system. A new study in Nature Communications published during the first week of Cop29 found that less than 16% of carbon credits issued represent real emissions reductions, meaning that the vast majority are hot air. Moments after governments approved the Paris carbon trading system, observers warned that the rules were not strict enough to avoid similar issues.Dr Lambert Schneider, one of the co-authors and a senior researcher at the Oeko-Institut, said these problems would undermine the Paris agreement if they spilled into the official UN system.“The available evidence suggests that many carbon credits are not backed by any actual emission reductions. If these quality issues continue under article 6, this could undermine our efforts to achieve our climate targets. It is critical that we fix the integrity issue of the market,” he said.“We currently see proposals on the table that would credit the natural absorption of carbon dioxide by forests. But these removals occur anyways and not because of any human intervention. If these credits are used by buyers to emit more, this would result in more carbon added up to the atmosphere. And the potential for issuing such credits is very large,” he said.There have been efforts to clean up standards in the sector, which could form part of the UN market. Verra, the leading carbon credit standard which was the subject of a joint Guardian investigation into their rainforest offsets that found they were mostly worthless, is introducing a new system for generating the carbon credits. Mandy Rambharos, the non-profit’s CEO, said they were determined to get it right and move on from recent issues.skip past newsletter promotionThe planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essentialPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotion“We’ve invested in millions of dollars for no guarantee of any return [in the new rainforest carbon credit methodology]. It’s all done at risk,” she said. “We need to take accountability for some things that went wrong. But I’m saying as well, it’s not just Verra.“The idea to grow the carbon market is to get climate financing to the right places. A London taxpayer is not going to give thousands of dollars to developing countries to reduce the emissions, especially if you’re not sure about those developing countries’ commitment. We’re all in the same bucket, whether it’s Mali, Saudi Arabia or China; that’s where the idea of where carbon markets came about,” she added.This month, a carbon credit integrity initiative – the ICVCM – approved three rainforest methodologies as high quality, including Verra’s new rules, meaning that buyers can trust that the credits represent real emission reductions. But those involved with the process have raised concerns about their approval. The Guardian understands that many experts did not think the methodologies met the standards. This is strongly contested by the ICVCM.Credits such as this could eventually form part of country-to-country carbon deals, and experts say that ensuring these deals have real environmental benefits will be key to their success.“The new rules are a start, but the risk of abuse still remains alive and well,” said Injy Johnstone, a research fellow at the University of Oxford. “We have to learn the lessons of past mistakes and watch for new ones this system could create, otherwise we risk the Paris agreement becoming a market failure,” she said.

Climate
Conservation
Forests

COP29 Highlights Costa Rica’s Role in Climate-Resilient Tourism

Costa Rica continues to lead the charge in sustainable tourism by championing the Baku Declaration on Climate Action, unveiled on November 20 at the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP29) in Baku, Azerbaijan. The declaration, endorsed by over 50 countries, highlights tourism’s critical role in combating climate change and building resilience. It calls for integrating […] The post COP29 Highlights Costa Rica’s Role in Climate-Resilient Tourism appeared first on The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate.

Costa Rica continues to lead the charge in sustainable tourism by championing the Baku Declaration on Climate Action, unveiled on November 20 at the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP29) in Baku, Azerbaijan. The declaration, endorsed by over 50 countries, highlights tourism’s critical role in combating climate change and building resilience. It calls for integrating sustainable tourism practices into national climate strategies, showcasing the sector’s potential to drive eco-friendly development. “Tourism is a major contributor to global economic growth, providing livelihoods for millions. However, it is also responsible for significant greenhouse gas emissions, ecosystem degradation, and remains vulnerable to climate change,” said COP29 President Mukhtar Babayev. During Tourism Day at COP29, the Baku Declaration encouraged national tourism administrations to align their efforts with Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs)—commitments made under the Paris Agreement. It also called for embedding climate action into tourism policies and accelerating National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) to build resilience against climate impacts. Franz Tattenbach, Costa Rica’s Minister of Environment and Energy, reaffirmed Costa Rica’s leadership during initial discussions. As chair of the UN Tourism Sustainability Committee, Tattenbach emphasized the urgent need to decarbonize tourism through green initiatives that protect biodiversity and ecosystems. “Costa Rica is committed to accelerating National Adaptation Plans in the tourism sector, ensuring greater resilience to climate change impacts,” Tattenbach said. Participating countries pledged to strengthen the Glasgow Declaration on Climate Action in Tourism, which provides a voluntary framework for increasing stakeholder commitments to climate adaptation and mitigation. This includes reducing emissions, adopting sustainable travel practices, and promoting responsible tourism globally. As the world navigates a path toward sustainability, Costa Rica’s leadership in climate-resilient tourism offers a blueprint for harmonizing economic growth with environmental stewardship. The post COP29 Highlights Costa Rica’s Role in Climate-Resilient Tourism appeared first on The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate.

Climate
Sustainable

Suggested Viewing

Total Disaster

Armed with realistic bird puppets, trickster environmental activists pretend to be oil company Total—staging a satirical press conference to introduce "RéHabitat," a program to rescue animals from the East African Oil Pipeline by relocating them to “more sustainable” habitats. Using humor and mischief, they expose a deadly ecological disaster in a zany effort to help #StopEACOP.

Activism
Energy
Animals

Capturing The Fire

When Louise Coghill saw the first plume of smoke begin to rise behind her parents property, she could never have predicted that in less than four hours, it would become a wall of flames, swallowing everything in its path. A photographer by trade, Louise has travelled the world documenting everything from the nomadic wanderers of Mongolia, to base life at Mount Everest. Capturing the extraordinary comes naturally to Louise, so when her family home in the semi-rural Western Australian town of Gidgegannup became engulfed in flames, her first instinct wasn’t to take shelter, it was to pick up her camera.

Conservation
Climate
Nature

Crossing the Divide

An Iowa farmer reacts swiftly when he hears that radical climate marchers plan to disrupt peace in his tiny town. What he does after that offers a lesson for would-be peacemakers everywhere.

Inspirational
Activism
Climate

Voices of Transition

Voices of Transition is an enthusiastic documentary on farmer- and community-led responses to food insecurity in a scenario of climate change, peak oil, and economic crisis. Concrete examples from Cuba, France, and the United Kingdom tell of a future society where our monoculture deserts will be restored to living soil, where fields will be introduced into our cities, and where independence from oil will help us live a richer, more fulfilling life.

Agriculture
Food
Climate

Reboot

Humans have exploited Earth to the point where it is no longer possible to live on it. Their only option is to relocate to Mars. When the last group of people has boarded the spaceship for the red planet, the Earth can finally breathe easy. Like an expressionist painting, Reboot depicts a world in which the absence of our species is the only chance nature has to recover its lushness and flourish once more.

Animation
Crisis
Cosmos

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.