I’m shocked. Shocked I say. How could we have known that punishing the companies we know are destroying the planet basically do whatever they want, with a pinky-promise they’ll do the right thing, would be a bad idea?
Do they even promise it will benefit local populations? The issue is that even if they are good projects from a viewpoint of carbon (which the companies argue), the global north is still ofsetting their emissions in the global south. Large swathes of land are reserved by these companies, with little or no benefit to the local population, only so they can keep their business models afloat in the western world. It's just yet another form of neocolonialism.
For sure! Those promises aren’t exactly binding, and they probably came up with excuses at the same time, and there aren’t any serious consequences to fucking it up so long as voters in their home country stop paying attention quickly enough(and they’re conservatives and centrists mostly so practically by definition they aren’t even paying attention in the first place).
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.