This post is Grassroots, meaning a reader posted it directly. If you see an issue with it, contact an editor.
If you’d like to post a Grassroots post, click here!

0.9
May 12, 2023

The Tree Planting Series IV. – Ambitious Tree-Planting Initiatives, Carbon Offsetting & ‘Plant a Tree’ Campaigns

When I started planting I believed that we’re helping the planet with all these tree-planting initiatives. But are we, really?

On the 8th of March, 2012 a huge group of people swarmed the island of Luzon in the Philippines and sunk over a million mangrove seedlings into the mud. And that only took them an hour.

It was a big deal that even an official adjudicator arrived from Guinness World Records and declared this event the new world record holder of most mangrove trees planted within an hour. Headlines followed all around the world talking about this world record.

I bet you imagine that coastline to be lush green from all these trees planted there, am I right? Hate to disappoint but a study in 2020 found that less than 2 percent of those trees had survived. And considering these trees were planted in 2012, they should be close to maturity at this point.

There have been many other tree planting initiatives over the years that faced a similar fate. Aggressive tree planting became a policy for governments since 2011, when the world’s governments have agreed to the Bonn Challenge, an initiative that’s designed to restore 860 million acres of forest (that’s larger than India) worldwide by 2030.

Overall that goal is realistic and achievable in that time frame. The only problem is the lack of follow-up on the progress of these efforts.

Carbon offsets are programs or initiatives that implement a “measurable avoidance or reduction of carbon or other greenhouse gasses. They work in one of two ways; one being slightly more straight-forward than the other. Consumers can support a carbon offset directly by themselves, this means that you give money to an organization that works with people somewhere in the world and their job is planting a number of trees, based on the amounts of donations they get, for instance.”

Carbon offsets (and “plant a tree” campaigns) are often offered to customers as compensation for a purchase or service, or used by the company themselves to compensate for their own emissions. The green trend of carbon offsetting for a consumer’s purchase or service has very quickly become a huge industry and naturally, it has got a lot of people wondering if it matters at all.

It’s not enough to simply plant a tree in the ground somewhere to offset your carbon imprint if that tree dies in the next few months and never reaches maturity. You only are told that your flight or product was offset, but there is no further information given about it. An average tree absorbs about 1 ton of CO2 in its lifetime, and with deforestation, intense agriculture, and wildfires, we need to keep trees safe, by protecting the ones we have and by planting new ones. However, many companies will mislead consumers into thinking that their services and products can be compensated for instantly because a tree is planted but it can take years for a tree to grow to a size that will have a measurable effect.

It is pretty much like green-washing the tree planting efforts as they only focus on how many trees are planted but nobody was checking if any of them were actually surviving.

The problem is that you don’t really know if the tree is actually being planted or if it’s in a place where it’s native and can thrive to begin with. If the carbon offsets are purchased by a company through a broker or several brokers, it can become almost impossible to find out where the carbon offsetting is actually taking place, or even if it actually takes place.

Carbon offsetting is hard to navigate and became a misleading tool of marketing rather than something that leads to actual change. Some companies purchase carbon offsets and then promote their business as carbon neutral, as the purchased offsets are equal to their own emissions, however to consumers “going carbon neutral” can easily be misunderstood. When we hear about someone “going carbon neutral” we often think that they did something to improve their own footprint and their own products – not that they bought carbon offsets elsewhere.

A European study from 2016 showed that 85% of offset projects they looked into, promoted their efforts before funding any projects.

Plant tree campaigns and carbon offsetting is also removing the focus from the companies completely. Instead of looking at the companies’ contribution to emissions and climate change, we celebrate them for the bare minimum because they didn’t actually change anything and often don’t calculate their entire business into offsetting (like airlines off-set your flights, but never the building of the plane or all the packaging they use to wrap your lunch and dinner).

Experts also express concerns about carbon offsetting and “tree-planting schemes” as a trend, because it takes the focus away from the fact that we need to reduce emissions across all parts of our economy, and simply carbon offsetting does not eliminate emissions, it often shifts them.

Governments and organizations are quick to organist people to plant trees but spend little to no time with determining whether the site is viable for planting in the first place.

Because of poor planning and the desire to appear environmentally-friendly, companies and governments are throwing away millions or billions of dollars into projects that aren’t yielding effective results.

This  field is under-regulated and companies can make these simplified claims like” buy one – plant one tree” where the primary goal is certainly not to plant trees, but to get more consumers purchase their product, and studies show that we are much more likely to buy something if we think we are also doing a good deed. These campaigns do not take into account that trees can take decades to remove significant emissions. They also do not take into account that planting trees is a labor and costs more than what they are advertising.

Campaigns where you get to off-set your travel by paying 1 or 2 Euros extra, or when you buy a beer for a dollar and get a tree planted with it, always got me wondering, how many trees they actually end up planting, because they certainly cannot produce the product you are buying and plant a tree for one Euro.

If you want to know which projects are legit and which ones are not, look for certificates,  results, and look for the profile of people that are working with the project. Look at the entire company, not just their carbon offsetting or tree planting ads– the ones who are legit ambitious regarding green actions will have taken steps other than carbon offsetting, like using renewable energy and such.

Planting a tree will never compensate for unnecessary products and over-consumption, but in cases where you have to buy something, or you have to transport yourself somewhere, carbon offsetting is a great idea to begin with when done properly.

Read 2 Comments and Reply
X

Read 2 comments and reply

Top Contributors Latest

Imola Tóth  |  Contribution: 80,665