Name: 關於碳信用額度的幾個基本概念｜碳信用額度真的有效嗎？ (Carbon Credits Don’t Really Work, But Could They?)
Uploaded: 2021-12-21T21:01:20.000Z
Duration: 5 min 23 s

Have you ever purchased a ticket for a flight online and had them ask you if you want to buy a carbon credit?

你有沒有在網路上購買飛機票時，被詢問是否要購買碳信用額度？

In theory, these credits are a way for individuals and companies to offset their emissions from carbon-intensive activities, like flying.

理論上，這些信用額度是個人和公司抵消在進行如飛行等高碳排放活動時，抵銷其排放二氧化碳的一種方式。

But can carbon credits really slow down the climate crisis?

但是，碳信用額度真的能延緩氣候危機嗎？

It might sound like all hype, but carbon credits are becoming increasingly popular.

這乍聽之下可能只是炒作而已，但碳信用額度其實正在變得越來越流行。

By 2050, the demand for them could explode by a factor of 100.

到 2050 年，市場上對它們的需求可能會爆炸性地增長一百倍。

Carbon credits are essentially tradable permits or certificates that give you the right to emit 1 metric ton of carbon dioxide or any other equivalent greenhouse gas.

碳信用額度本質上是可交易的許可證或證書，賦予你排放一公噸二氧化碳或任何其他同等溫室氣體的權利。

And these credits can be traded on two types of markets: mandatory and voluntary.

而這些信用可以在兩種類型的市場上進行交易：強制和自願。

A mandatory, or compliance market grants governments and companies a fixed number of credits.

一個強制性的，或者說是合規性的市場，會給予政府和公司固定數量的信用額度。

This allows regulators to set a cap, or an upper limit on the amount of carbon or other similar greenhouse gases a business can produce.

這讓監管機構可以對企業所排放的二氧化碳或其他類似溫室氣體的數量設定一個上限。

These credits can be bought and sold so that companies that gobble up their allowance of carbon emissions, can purchase credits from companies that have some of theirs left to spend.

這些信用額度可以自由在市場上購買和出售，如此一來，那些把自身二氧化碳排放配額消耗掉的公司便能夠從仍有配額的公司手上買下排放權。

This is how the EU's Emissions Trading System works.

這就是歐盟二氧化碳排放交易系統的運作方式。

But most of us are more familiar with voluntary markets.

但我們大多數人對自願市場更為熟悉。

While they're often called credits, these markets actually deal in carbon offsets, like the ones that individuals can buy from airlines and rental car companies.

雖然它們通常被稱為信用額度，但這些市場實際上在進行的是抵消碳排放的交易。一般人能從航空公司和租車公司購買到的碳信用額度就是這種類型。

With voluntary markets there is no fixed limit on the number of credits that can exist, and the money used to purchase these offsets funds projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

在自願市場中，信用額度的總量並沒有固定的限制，而用於購買這些用來抵銷排放量的資金則會用於資助減少溫室氣體排放的計畫。

These projects can range from promoting cleaner-burning stoves in developing countries, to evaluating better carbon capture technologies, to reforestation projects.

這些項目的範圍包括在開發中國家推廣能夠更有效率燃燒的火爐、評估更好的碳捕獲技術，以及重新造林計畫等等。

So far, this seems pretty straightforward.

到目前為止聽起來都很直截了當。

But actually, the market is kind of like the wild, wild west!

但實際上，這個市場完全是無人可管的狂野地帶！

For starters, there is no international standard that accounts for all these voluntary carbon credits.

首先，自願型的碳信用額度並沒有一個統一的國際標準。

And while there are a number of registries that track carbon offset projects and issue permits, not all of them are as reputable.

而雖然有許多的單位會追蹤碳排放抵銷計畫並發放許可證，卻不是所有的單位都有著相應的信譽。

Reputable meaning that 1 carbon credit purchased actually represents 1 metric ton of CO2 being removed.

在這裡有信譽的意思是，購買一個碳信用額度代表實際移除了一公噸的二氧化碳。

As many as 60% of all carbon credits in the market fail to do this.

但市場上多達 60% 的碳信用額度都沒有做到這一點。

So where are those credits coming up short?

那麼這些信用額度到底在哪裡出了問題？

Well for one, the emissions each credit represent are not being permanently removed.

首先，一些信用額度背後的碳排放並沒有被永久消除。

Reforestation has been a popular way to offset carbon emissions.

重新造林一直是抵消碳排放的熱門方式。

But recently fires in the American West caused some forestry-offset projects to go up in flames, releasing stored carbon back into the atmosphere.

但最近美國西部的大火導致一些植木造林抵銷項目化為烏有，將其中儲存的碳釋放回大氣之中。

However, capture technologies that store carbon dioxide in rocks might be more permanent.

不過，將二氧化碳儲存在岩石中的碳捕獲技術則可能更加持久。

Also, for carbon credits to work, the greenhouse gas reductions they represent need to be additional, meaning any project they fund would not have been possible without them.

此外，為了使讓信用額度實際發揮作用，它們所減少的溫室氣體排放量需要是在原本的系統上額外附加的減排量。也就是說任何的碳排放抵銷計畫都要是專款專用，額外進行的計畫才行。

For example, if the construction of a wind farm is required by law, it's not additional because it would've happened anyway and the purchase of any credits for its construction would be pointless.

例如，假如一個風力發電廠因為法律要求的原因而被建造出來，那代表它並不是個能額外提供減排量的計畫，因為不論有沒有買碳信用額度它都仍會被建設完成，為其購買碳信用額度便沒有意義。

Sometimes, a credit is claimed twice; once by the project doing the carbon removal, and a second time by the country the project was developed in.

有時，一個信用額度會被重複兌現。第一次由移除碳排放量的計畫，第二次則是由該項目所在的國家政府。

Brazil, for example, argues that efforts to protect their forests should be able to count towards national emissions targets, and that they should still be able to sell credits for those protected forests.

舉例來說，巴西認為保護其森林的努力應該能夠計入國家碳排放目標，而且他們應該仍然能夠為這些受他們保護的森林出售信用額度。

This "double-counting" undermines confidence in the system, and even makes greenhouse gas emissions worse.

這種「重複計算」破壞了人們對系統的信心，甚至反而使溫室氣體的排放狀況更加嚴重。

The money associated with carbon credits can also cause some groups to report carbon savings that aren't real.

碳信用額度所涉及的金錢利益，也可能導致一些團體報告並不真實的碳減量數額。

Mass Audubon is an organization that protects nature. It's sort of their thing.

Mass Audubon 是一個保護自然的組織。這就是他們組織的宗旨目標。

But in 2015, they earned 6 million dollars selling carbon credits, after suggesting that they would log 9,700 acres of their own preserved forest.

但在 2015 年，就在他們表示將會在他們所保護的森林清出 9700 英畝的土地之後，他們光靠出售碳排放權就賺了 600 萬美元。

If this nonprofit received credits for forests that were never truly in danger, does it really reduce carbon emissions?

如果這個非營利組織能夠從並沒有真正面臨危機的森林獲得信用額度，那麼它真的有減少碳排放嗎？

In some cases, heavily-polluting companies can use carbon credits to make it seem like they're doing more good than they actually are, a move environmentalists call greenwashing.

在某些情況下，造成嚴重汙染的公司可以利用碳信用額度來使他們看起來做了更多好事，而這種做法被環保主義者稱為「漂綠」。

Occidental Petroleum was called out by watch groups for doing this when they rebranded their product as "carbon-neutral oil," even though it's just normal oil offset by carbon credits.

例如西方石油公司在將其產品重新命名為「碳中和油」時，即被監督組織指責為漂綠行為，因為該產品只是藉由碳信用額度抵消碳排放量的普通石油而已。

Despite all their problems, carbon credits could still work.

儘管存在著種種問題，碳信用額度仍然可以發揮一些作用。

Some companies are combining satellite imagery and AI to verify that forestry offset programs are living up to their carbon sequestration claims.

一些公司正在結合衛星影像和人工智能，來驗證造林排碳抵消計劃是否如其所聲稱的封存了如此多的二氧化碳。

And in June of 2021, the US Senate passed the Growing Climate Solutions Act to help farmers purchase and sell high-quality credits.

在 2021 年 6 月，美國參議院通過了《成長氣候解決方案法》以幫助農民購買和銷售高排碳品質的信用額度。

In 2020, carbon credits offset 210 million metric tons of CO2.

在 2020 年，碳信用額度抵消了 2.1 億公噸的二氧化碳。

That's a tiny drop in the bucket compared to the nearly 39 gigatons emitted by human activity in 2020.

但與 2020 年人類活動所排放的近 39 千兆噸相比，這不過是滄海一粟。

Like a credit card, we can't pay off the minimum balance every month and still expect to clear our carbon debt.

就像信用卡一樣，我們不能期望著只要每個月付清最低應繳額，就能清除掉我們的碳債。

In the future, we're going to have to get really creative in how we store carbon.

在未來，我們將不得不想出更有創意的方式來儲存二氧化碳。

Check out this video on how scientists are using CO2 to create diamonds.

看看這個影片來瞭解科學家如何利用二氧化碳來製造鑽石吧。

Got some cool science you'd like to see us cover?

你心裡有想要我們報導的酷炫科學新知嗎？

請在下面的評論中告訴我們吧。

Make sure to subscribe and thanks for watching Seeker.

請務必記得訂閱，並感謝你觀看 Seeker。