Skip to content
Menu
REDD-Monitor
  • Start here
  • About REDD-Monitor
  • REDD: An introduction
  • Contact
REDD-Monitor

“Great news for the environment!” The aviation industry weakens carbon offsetting scheme even further

Posted on 1 July 20201 July 2020

By Chris Lang

The International Civil Aviation Organization‘s Council agreed yesterday to change the baseline year for its Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA). Under CORSIA, airlines were supposed to buy carbon credits to offset their emissions above a baseline of the average emissions in 2019 and 2020.

Because of the coronvirus, emissions from aviation are dramatically lower than last year and therefore the baseline would have been much lower. The aviation would have had to buy far more carbon credits at a cost of billions of dollars. ICAO has therefore agreed to change the baseline to 2019 following lobbying from the International Air Transport Association.

Great news for the environment!

ICAO went into full-on Orwellian mode on Twitter, describing this weakening of an already molecular thin attempt to cover up the aviation industry’s ever increasing emissions as “Great news for the environment!”:

CORSIA “worse than nothing”

As Magdalena Heuwieser, a campaigner with the Stay Grounded network, points out, “CORSIA is not a useful instrument for lowering aviation’s climate impact. In fact, it is worse than nothing. That was already the case before the baseline change.”

Heuwieser argues that aviation emissions should be regulated by the UNFCCC, as well as at national and regional levels. Countries should include aviation emissions in their national climate plans and emission budgets. Heuwieser says,

“Emission cuts in aviation in line with the 1.5°C limit are only achievable by reducing flights since offsetting and technological approaches fail to do the job. This structural change of our mobility system has to go along with a just transition for the workers.”

Undermining carbon trading

Annie Petsonk, International Counsel at the Environmental Defense Fund, worries that ICAO’s decision to change the baseline will undermine carbon markets. “Changing baselines is a bad precedent for the development of carbon markets in other countries and sectors,” Petsonk says in a press statement.

The irony is that the threat to the CORSIA scheme is the massively reduced emissions from aviation. The scheme that is supposed to address emissions from aviation stops working when emissions are massively reduced – which of course is exactly what we need in order to address the climate crisis.

Of course, CORSIA was never intended to address emissions from the aviation sector. Its entire purpose is to allow emissions to continue without restraint, while giving the impression of doing something about the climate crisis.

ICAO’s decision to water down CORSIA will massively reduce the demand for carbon credits. Carbon market proponents like EDF’s Petsonk, had hoped that an ever expanding aviation industry relying on offsets would provide a boost to carbon markets. Pollution from aviation would create a steady market for REDD credits, for example, where none has existed before.

Stay Grounded’s Heuweiser explains what’s wrong with CORSIA – beyond the changing baseline:

“CORSIA is a total wreck beyond repair. In fact, it was broken from the very beginning. It covers a tiny fraction of aviation’s projected emissions and completely ignores the huge climate impact of airplane emissions other than CO2. It relies on harmful offsets and biofuels, both neo-colonial measures that shift the problems to communities in the Global South. CORSIA is not only a means for greenwashing aviation: holding on to it also blocks effective regulation and leads to further problems.”

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

SUBSCRIBE!

Recent themes
30x30
Natural Climate Solutions
WWF's conservation scandals
Aviation and offsetting
Conservation Watch

Recent Comments

  • Ben on Response from Kurt Kaiser, Director of Compass Carbon: “Your article was of great concern to us”. And some questions for Kaiser from REDD-Monitor
  • James Mewa Kamaya on Papua New Guinea’s Forest Authority cancels Mayur Resources’ Kamula Doso REDD project
  • Benedikt von Butler on Switzerland’s offsetting deal with Peru excludes REDD. It will still not reduce emissions
  • George Wolfe on The Carbon Credit Registry carbon credit “reformatting” scam continues: A company calling itself Williams & Gray is running a recovery room scam
  • Bobby on Living Investments UK and Hyperion Management are boiler room scams that offered investments in teak plantations in Costa Rica. But will the UK authorities take any action?

Recent Posts

  • REDD-Monitor is moving to Substack
  • REDD Project in Brazil Nut concessions in Madre de Dios, Peru finally started paying communities a decade after the project started. “I’m still lacking money,” says one community member
  • REDD-Monitor’s top ten posts in 2022
  • The harsh reality of 30×30: The EU is keen to allow extractivism in the 30×30 target – but not Indigenous Peoples’ territories
  • Human rights abuses against Indigenous Peoples and the proposed “30×30” target

Recent Comments

  • Ben on Response from Kurt Kaiser, Director of Compass Carbon: “Your article was of great concern to us”. And some questions for Kaiser from REDD-Monitor
  • James Mewa Kamaya on Papua New Guinea’s Forest Authority cancels Mayur Resources’ Kamula Doso REDD project
  • Benedikt von Butler on Switzerland’s offsetting deal with Peru excludes REDD. It will still not reduce emissions
  • George Wolfe on The Carbon Credit Registry carbon credit “reformatting” scam continues: A company calling itself Williams & Gray is running a recovery room scam
  • Bobby on Living Investments UK and Hyperion Management are boiler room scams that offered investments in teak plantations in Costa Rica. But will the UK authorities take any action?

Issues and Organisations

30x30 AB 32 Andes Amazon Boiler rooms California Carbon Credits Carbon Offsets CDM Conservation-Watch Conservation International COP19 Warsaw COP21 Paris Cryptocurrency Deforestation Evictions FCPF Financing REDD Fossil fuels FSC Green Climate Fund Greenpeace Green Resources Guest post HBS Human rights ICAO Illegal logging Indigenous Peoples Natural Climate Solutions NGO statements Plantations R-M interview REDD and rights REDD in the news Risk RSPO-Watch Safeguards Sengwer The Nature Conservancy UN-REDD UNFCCC Verra World Bank WRM WWF

Countries

Australia Bolivia Brazil Cambodia Cameroon Canada China Colombia Congo Basin region Costa Rica DR Congo Ecuador El Salvador European Union Finland France Gabon Germany Guyana India Indonesia Kenya Madagascar Malaysia Mexico Netherlands Nicaragua Nigeria Norway Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Republic of Congo Sierra Leone Spain Sweden Tanzania Thailand Uganda UK Uncategorized United Arab Emirates USA West Papua
©2026 REDD-Monitor | Powered by SuperbThemes!