Craign said that the plan’s safeguards can prevent the problems identified by CarbonPlan.
Clegern said that California’s carbon offset is considered an additional carbon reduction because the minimum price has played a “conservative supportive role.” He explained that without it, many landowners could even fall to a lower level without compensation.
Cleggen added that the agency’s regulations were passed after a long process of debate and were supported by the court. The California Court of Appeals found that the Air Resources Board has the right to use standardized methods to assess whether a project is another project.
Alice Kaswan, a professor of law at the University of San Francisco School of Law, said in an email that the court did not make an independent ruling on the validity of the standard and “respects the agency’s ruling. “
California’s law requires the state’s total control and trading regulations to ensure that emission reductions are “true, permanent, quantifiable, and verifiable” and “in addition to other greenhouse gas emission reductions that will occur under other circumstances.”
Kaswan said: “If there is new scientific information that raises serious questions about the integrity of compensation, then it can be said that CARB has always been responsible for considering that information and revising its agreement accordingly.” “The agency’s obligation is to enforce the law, and the law Additionality is required.”
One day in early spring, Audubon scientist Lautzenheiser took a reporter to the forest protected by the compensation project. The trees here are mainly tall white pine trees, mixed with hemlock, maple and oak. Lautzenheiser is usually the only person in this part of the forest, where he spends hours looking for rare plants or investigating streams.
The non-profit organization’s planning document acknowledges that forests that join the California program are protected before they begin to generate compensation: resource conservation value. “