Who gains from saving nature
Ledger 1 : 33 — For each dollar financing nature-based solutions in 2023, about $33 financed activities harmful to nature. (UNEP)
Cases / Carbon credits · Australia · 2022–2024

Australian government rejects claim that natural regeneration credits are worthless

Short record: the main facts, with sources. A full case file has not been prepared.

Nature's voice · report
No measurement of the harm done to me here is on record.
Did nature suffer? Not measured.
Not on record
  • The record does not name which of my species, waters, soils or forests were harmed.
What the record lacks: 1 none on record · 2 insufficient · 1 not measured See the gaps

Australia's natural regeneration (HIR) carbon credits were reported to have limited impact, and the government rejected a claim that the credits are worthless. At stake: whether the credits pay for forest regrowth that would not otherwise have happened.

What?
The Australian government rejected a claim that 25 million ACCU credits are worthless, as reported by QCI. QCI
Where?
Australia QCI
When?
Period 2022 to 2024.
Who?
Gained
None on record
Lost
None on record
Harmed
None on record
Why?
Not stated in the sources reviewed.
How?
Carbon offsets based on natural regeneration (HIR). QCI
5 of 6 questions answered from the record · open: who

What happened

The record, in order.

QCI reported that the Australian government rejected a claim that 25 million ACCU credits are worthless.

QCI's summary describes HIR offsets as having limited impact.

    In court and with insurers

    Every proceeding and every insurer decision on record.

    Lawsuits and rulings

    No court case on record. No court has ruled on this case.

    Insurers

    No insurer decision on record.

    What we don't know

    Undisclosed, unproven, untried: recorded as data.

    Nature

    • Not measured Harm to nature: The record holds no measurement of harm to nature.

    Record

    • Insufficient Reported but not verified: vegetation change in 182 projects matched neighbouring areas (Macintosh et al., Communications Earth & Environment; not checked).
    • Insufficient Reported but not verified: about 90% of offset demand was not met, per a NSW Audit Office review as reported by RenewEconomy.
    • None on record Not stated in the sources reviewed: who bought, sold or profited from the credits, or the date of the audit.

    Did the harm stop?

    Not stated in the sources reviewed.

    Who paid?

    Not stated in the sources reviewed.

    Sources

    Voices on record: — Company or project— Government and regulators— Courts✓ Press and investigations— Communities and civil society— Researchers

    Connected cases

    Related matters, and cases linked to this one through the same organisations, with the role each played in both.

    Carbon and conservation finance

    Carbon credit
    A certificate representing one tonne of carbon dioxide (or equivalent) that a project says it reduced, avoided or removed. Buyers use credits to balance their own emissions in climate claims.
    Offset
    Using carbon credits to balance emissions released elsewhere, so that a buyer can claim lower or zero net emissions.