When the fight against climate change becomes an excuse to perpetuate the destruction of nature
Sometimes it takes many years for truths to come to light, for sealed lips to part, and for closed eyes to finally open. At times, a person embarks on a path with a heart full of hope and eyes shining bright, believing it will lead to a better fate—only to realize, along the way, that what seemed like a way forward was in fact a dead end, a path that only wastes time and distances them from their true goal.
It is in such moments that the wise must act—take a lucid look at the past, reassess misguided choices, and, with a clear understanding of their current position, act swiftly and rightly to make amends.
Today, we stand at such a pivotal crossroads.
“Net zero” carbon policies are revealing their inefficacy more and more each day. And yet, we find strange comfort in the soothing belief that if there is a scientific consensus behind them, they must be right. We lose sight of the scale of the disaster, clinging in vain to naïve and optimistic predictions, letting precious time slip away.
The claim that warming can be limited to 1.5°C is such a colossal lie that it almost convinces us that, for a falsehood so vast to be accepted by so many, there must be some truth in it. But there is none.
A Different Voice: A Dissonant Note of Clarity
In the global climate debate, “carbon neutrality” has emerged as the ultimate political goal. Governments, major corporations, and international institutions all pledge—armed with metrics—to reach “net zero emissions” by 2050. Yet a growing number of climate scientists, activists, and scholars are challenging the validity of these pledges. Not only are they scientifically inadequate to address the climate crisis, but they also offer a moral and communicative shield to those actively destroying nature.
In a jointly authored
article by three renowned researchers—James Dyke, Robert Watson, and Wolfgang Knorr—the authors sound the alarm: net zero promises are more about “magical thinking” than sound scientific strategy
The Core Problem: Promises Detached from Physical Reality
Carbon neutrality largely hinges on modeled projections of carbon capture through technologies that are not yet viable on a large scale, such as CCS (carbon capture and storage), or through mass tree planting initiatives. These solutions remain largely theoretical or marginal in practice—meanwhile, atmospheric CO₂ levels continue to reach historic highs.
According to a 2023
report by the Global Carbon Project , global CO₂ emissions reached 36.8 billion tonnes, while the growth rate of carbon capture technologies remains negligible in comparison to what is needed. This widening gap exposes a stark disconnect between political rhetoric and the climate reality.
A PR Tool for Polluters: Greenwashing in Action
Major companies—particularly in the energy, aviation, fashion, and automotive sectors—use carbon neutrality as a rebranding tool to appear environmentally responsible. By purchasing “carbon credits,” notorious polluters claim to be “neutral” without making any structural changes to their production models.
Some investigations have cast doubt on the actual effectiveness of carbon credits certified by organizations like Verra, though there is not yet a definitive scientific consensus on their overall uselessness.
A Betrayal of Climate Justice
The logic of carbon offsetting—supposedly designed to mitigate the climate impacts of countries and corporations in the Global North—often translates, in practice, into a neo-colonial form of environmental management. Lands in Africa, Asia, or Latin America are seized in the name of reforestation or conservation projects, frequently without the free, prior, and informed consent of local populations. These communities—already marginalized—see their ways of life upended and their territorial rights ignored, all in the name of climate targets set elsewhere.
This mechanism fuels a new form of climate injustice: it is the populations least responsible for global emissions who are forced to bear the burden of environmental policies shaped by the wealthiest. In reality, offsetting projects often become imposed solutions—forced upon people without their input and offering little in the way of tangible benefits in return. The greening of rhetoric thus conceals the ongoing perpetuation of global inequality, cloaked in the language of ecology.
The large-scale deployment of offsetting projects in the Global South leads to land rights violations, the displacement of local populations, and the destruction of biodiversity. Under the pretext of planting trees to absorb carbon, old-growth forests are at times replaced by monoculture plantations—offering no genuine ecological benefit.
Contradictory Policies in the Face of a Climate Emergency
Even as states trumpet their climate commitments, many continue to heavily subsidize fossil fuels. In 2023,
the IMF estimated that global fossil fuel subsidies amounted to $7 trillion. In such a context, the promise of carbon neutrality appears more like a cosmetic maneuver than a genuine transition.
Toward Real Transformation, Not Illusory Compensation
Carbon neutrality cannot be an end in itself. It must go hand in hand with drastic emission reductions at the source, a progressive phase-out of fossil fuels, and a transformation of economic systems toward greater frugality and justice. It is time to shift from a narrative of compensation to one of responsibility.
This is not merely a technical issue—it is a political and ethical one. As Dyke, Watson, and Knorr remind us: “The choices we make today will shape the lives of future generations.” But for that to happen, those choices must be real, bold, and free from the illusion of easy neutrality.
Comment
Reply