The following submission statement was provided by /u/Portalrules123:

SS:

I think this is an important finding to discuss, as we need to be able to objectively determine what measures are effective and which are not when it comes to combatting climate change on a global scale. It seems that several studies are now showing that the carbon offsetting touted by the concept's largest provider is largely just an example of "greenwashing" that is hardly doing anything relatively speaking. It seems pretty evident that offsetting, at least in this format, isn't gonna be much of a help going into the future in terms of effectively helping the environment. More empirical solutions rather than this seemingly indirect/ineffective movement of money to offsetting projects are the answer, if anything I am suspecting that carbon offsetting is largely just PR to try and deflect attention away from the systemic issues of the capitalist system, a way to keep on producing and producing and growing without making the systemic changes required.

​

>The two studies from the international group of researchers found just eight out of 29 Verra-approved projects where further analysis was possible showed evidence of meaningful deforestation reductions.
>
>The journalists were able to do further analysis on those projects, comparing the estimates made by the offsetting projects with the results obtained by the scientists. The analysis indicated about 94% of the credits the projects produced should not have been approved.
>
>Credits from 21 projects had no climate benefit, seven had between 98% and 52% fewer than claimed using Verra’s system, and one had 80% more impact, the investigation found.
>
>Separately, the study by the University of Cambridge team of 40 Verra projects found that while a number had stopped some deforestation, the areas were extremely small. Just four projects were responsible for three-quarters of the total forest that was protected.
>
>The journalists again analysed these results more closely and found that, in 32 projects where it was possible to compare Verra’s claims with the study finding, baseline scenarios of forest loss appeared to be overstated by about 400%. Three projects in Madagascar have achieved excellent results and have a significant impact on the figures. If those projects are not included, the average inflation is about 950%.
>
>The studies used different methods and time periods, looked at different ranges of projects, and the researchers said no modelling approach is ever perfect, acknowledging limitations in each study. However, the data showed broad agreement on the lack of effectiveness of the projects compared with the Verra-approved predictions.

Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/10fchak/revealed_more_than_90_of_rainforest_carbon/j4vww3g/