A major study conducted by 11 academics has revealed that Australia’s primary carbon offsets method, known as “human-induced regeneration,” has largely failed to improve tree cover as promised, thus doing little to combat the climate crisis.
Published in the nature journal Communications Earth & Environment, the research analyzed 182 projects in arid and semi-desert areas, finding that forest cover had either stagnated or declined in nearly 80% of cases.
The study highlights the global significance of Australia’s forest regeneration method, which is the world’s fifth-largest nature-based offsets program, covering nearly 42 million hectares. Despite the issuance of more than 37 million carbon credits, meant to represent CO2 drawn from the atmosphere, the projects have not effectively reduced emissions as intended.
Lead researcher Andrew Macintosh, an environmental law professor at the Australian National University, criticized the management of the scheme, describing it as a “sham” and a fraud. The findings add to a growing body of scientific literature questioning the efficacy of carbon offsets and the potential for non-existent or impermanent emissions reductions.
Co-author Megan Evans from the University of New South Wales emphasized that the projects are not sequestering the claimed amount of carbon, resulting in an increase in carbon pollution rather than reduction. The researchers called on the Australian government to cease issuing carbon credits for regeneration projects to preserve the integrity of the carbon market and the country’s decarbonization efforts.
In response, the Clean Energy Regulator defended the integrity of the carbon credit scheme, citing previous reviews that affirmed the effectiveness of the human-induced regeneration method. Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen also supported the scheme’s integrity but acknowledged the need for reforms.
The study’s findings underscore the challenges of relying on carbon offsets to address climate change, particularly in arid and semi-desert regions like those analyzed in Australia. Despite the intentions behind such projects, their actual impact on emissions reduction appears to be limited, raising concerns about the effectiveness of current climate mitigation strategies.