Hey Elias! Thank you for all the effort you are putting into sharing your expertise in the field of forest carbon and shedding some light into the tragedies of the market. In one of the videos you were mentioning that reforestation projects that are based on carbon credits alone are not possible under 30$/tonne. My own calculations come out at the same estimation. Do you have any literature recommendations with regards to that specific claim?
Also, I noticed you are not yet on twitter. Would be nice to have u on the network. E.g. the journalist that put out the article from DIE ZEIT was mentioning you there.
This is great Elias. Thanks for these videos and your takes. I agree that tonne-year accounting has the potential to improve the quality of the climate impact of carbon offsets. This improved quality will have to be reflected in a higher price for storing carbon at a 1:100 ratio to be competitive with aggressive harvesting. If offsets from tonne-year accounting projects can demand the same price as offsets from the emerging carbon removal projects it would make storing carbon in this manner competitive.
![เขามัทรี - เอ็กซ์ ศุภกฤต - จอนนี่มิวสิค [ Official MV ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/AS9ufKuQIVs/mqdefault.jpg)
Hey Elias! Thank you for all the effort you are putting into sharing your expertise in the field of forest carbon and shedding some light into the tragedies of the market. In one of the videos you were mentioning that reforestation projects that are based on carbon credits alone are not possible under 30$/tonne. My own calculations come out at the same estimation. Do you have any literature recommendations with regards to that specific claim?
Also, I noticed you are not yet on twitter. Would be nice to have u on the network. E.g. the journalist that put out the article from DIE ZEIT was mentioning you there.
This is great Elias. Thanks for these videos and your takes. I agree that tonne-year accounting has the potential to improve the quality of the climate impact of carbon offsets. This improved quality will have to be reflected in a higher price for storing carbon at a 1:100 ratio to be competitive with aggressive harvesting. If offsets from tonne-year accounting projects can demand the same price as offsets from the emerging carbon removal projects it would make storing carbon in this manner competitive.