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

How Conservation International’s Blue Carbon mangrove project in Colombia helps greenwash Apple’s extractivist operations

Posted on 11 June 202111 June 2021

By Chris Lang

In May 2021, a mangrove conservation project covering 7,646 hectares in Colombia started selling “blue carbon credits”. The Blue Carbon Project in the Bay of Cispatá is funded by Apple and run by Conservation International, Colombia’s Marine and Coastal Research Institute, the Omacha Foundation, and Colombian government environmental authorities. The project started in 2015.

The carbon credits are generated from the carbon stored in the mangrove forest, including the carbon stored in underwater soils. The project is the first to sell carbon credits from underwater soils, and the first to do so for conserving, rather than replanting, mangroves.

In September 2020, carbon trading standards organisation Verra published a “blue carbon conservation methodology”, which involved a revision to one of Verra’s existing methodologies (VM0007).

Verra’s website tells us that Apple has so far bought 17,000 carbon credits from the project which were “Retired on behalf of Apple’s FY20 CCF” – CCF stands for “comprehensive carbon footprint”.

The project made three other sales in May 2021, totalling 42,363 carbon credits, but Verra’s website doesn’t tell us who bought those credits.

The Blue Carbon Initiative

Mangroves can store up to 10 times more carbon per hectare than land-based forests. Which means that for a smaller area, more carbon credits can be sold. Conservation International is part of the Blue Carbon Initiative, along with the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (IOC-UNESCO).

The Blue Carbon Initiative is yet another carbon trading mechanism that equates carbon stored temporarily in trees and soils with carbon stored permanently below ground in the form of fossil fuels. Permanently, that is, until corporations and governments come along, extract the fossil fuels and burn them. The Blue Carbon Initiative’s carbon credits allow the continued burning of fossil fuels – and burning fossil is, of course, what’s driving the climate crisis.

Of course, protecting mangrove forests is important. But protecting forests cannot be an excuse for continued environmental destruction elsewhere, whether in the form of continued greenhouse gas emissions, or extractivism.

Blue Carbon

A flood of blue carbon credits?

One of the consulting firms hired to write the new Verra methodology was Silvestrum Climate Associates. Steve Crooks, a coastal geomorphologist with Silvestrum told Hakai Magazine that,

“This is a big deal. Creating a network of such projects around the world will be hugely important in contributing to tackling climate change, conserving coastal ecosystems, and supporting sustainable livelihoods of coastal communities.”

Conservation International is hoping to generate a flood of blue carbon credits. In its 2020 Annual Report, Conservation International writes that blue carbon ecosystems “have been shut out of carbon markets, precluding incentives to protect them while depriving coastal communities of economic opportunities”.

Jennifer Howard, marine climate change director for Conservation International, told Hakai Magazine that they won’t sell blue carbon credits to just anyone.

“Companies have asked to purchase them, and we have said no. We’re going to be doing an invite-only auction to create competition between companies we want to sell to. Not everyone does that.”

Unfortunately, Howard doesn’t mention which companies Conservation International said no to. It’s difficult to imagine any company that Conservation International wouldn’t want to greenwash. Conservation International currently works with Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Nissan, Toyota, Unilever, Disney, Northrop Grunman, BHP Group, Sime Darby, among other massively polluting and destructive corporations.

Apple is not green

Apple is also one of Conservation International’s “corporate engagements”. Apple is the opposite of a green corporation. Overconsumption is its raison d’être. In 2020, the company sold almost 200 million iPhones, and a total of more than 80 million computers and iPads. But Conservation International isn’t interested in pointing out the craziness of marketing a new iPhone every year.

Zhengzhou is one of the most polluted cities in China. It’s also a major production site for the iPhone. The pollution increases every year as factories ramp up production before the latest iPhone goes on sale.

Apple assembles almost all of its products in China. There’s the problem of the labour conditions in the factories making components for the iPhone – low wages, long working days, and bad working conditions.

Data centres in Guiyang and Inner Mongolia will store the personal data of Apple’s Chinese customers. The computer servers are run by a state-owned Chinese firm. As the New York Times reported recently,

Apple has largely ceded control to the Chinese government. Chinese state employees physically manage the computers. Apple abandoned the encryption technology it used elsewhere after China would not allow it. And the digital keys that unlock information on those computers are stored in the data centers they’re meant to secure.

And there’s the mining needed for the large number of minerals used in the iPhone. In 2019, Apple was named in a lawsuit brought by families of children killed or injured while mining in the Democratic Republic of Congo.

But Conservation International doesn’t mention any of the problems that Apple’s shiny products create. Instead, Conservation International tells us that the mangrove project in the Bay of Cispatá, “aims to reduce emissions by at least 17,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide, equivalent to the entire emissions of the fleet of vehicles updating Apple Maps over a decade”.

As if the fleet of vehicles updating Apple Maps were the most serious environmental and social problem caused by Apple’s operations.

As with all offsetting projects, Conservation International’s blue carbon mangrove project in Colombia is a dangerous distraction from the urgent need to stop extractivism and to leave fossil fuels in the ground.
 


This post is part of a series of posts on REDD-Monitor looking at REDD and environmental injustice in the Andes Amazon.
 

1 thought on “How Conservation International’s Blue Carbon mangrove project in Colombia helps greenwash Apple’s extractivist operations”

  1. Chris Lang says:
    23 June 2021 at 4:21 pm

    Jenny Chan, Mark Selden, and Pun Ngai spent a decade researching undercover at Foxconn’s manufacturing sites in China. Their book “Dying for an iPhone: Apple, Foxconn, and The Lives of China’s Workers” was published in 2020.

    Here’s a recent interview Chris Hedges did with Jenny Chan:

    [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60p6J1SItwk&w=560&h=315%5D

    In May 2021, Hedges wrote a piece on SheerPost: “Chris Hedges: “Dying for an iPhone”. Here’s the opening paragraph:

    Global capitalists have turned back the clock to the early days of the Industrial Revolution. The working class is increasingly bereft of rights, blocked from forming unions, paid starvation wages, subject to wage theft, under constant surveillance, fired for minor infractions, exposed to dangerous carcinogens, forced to work overtime, given punishing quotas and abandoned when they are sick and old. Workers have become, here and abroad, disposable cogs to corporate oligarchs, who wallow in obscene personal wealth that dwarfs the worst excesses of the Robber Barons.

    This is what Conservation International is greenwashing.

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!