the internet company, yahoo is withdrawing from china, says the increasingly challenging business and legal environment makes operating that to difficult withdraw coincides with new legislation known as china's personal information protection law. it controls what data companies can gather and how it's stored. yahoo joins a long list of social media and technology companies that no longer operate in china. ah, the quick look at main stories. now. if you government has declared a nation wide state of emergency is fighting against to crying, rebels continues. coming on the eve of years and fighting broke out in the northern region, fight to say they are now in control of 2 towns on a major highway leading to the federal capital. there are concerns the fighting could now escalate with the 2 grey people's liberation front. joining forces with

another group, the aroma liberation army, the us envoy to the horn of africa denounced in this we have consistently condemned the t p l. f. expansion of the war outside to grow, and we continue to call the t p l f to withdraw from afar. and i'm horror. that expansion of the war however, is as predictable as it is unacceptable. given that the ethiopian government began cutting off humanitarian relief and commercial access to 2 great in june. which continues to this day despite horrifying conditions of report widespread famine and near famine conditions that have shocked the world. the 2nd day of the climate, some in glasgow, is delivered to major agreements, more than 100 nations of patch to reverse deforestation within the next decade, with the support of brazil's president. this might continue threats to the amazon

leaders also agree to the levels of me saying by 30 percent, the gas is seen as one of the key drivers of global warming. well, well leaders on our leaving the conference with delegates to continue more than 10 days of discussions. at least 19 people have been killed in an attack in afghan, austin's capital, cobble dozens more wounded in 2 large explosions. and then the gunfire which ensues happen near a ministry hospital and the no claims of responsibility so far. but the bloss add to a growing list of attacks in killing since the taliban seized power in august. and at least 10 people have been killed in an attack which took place and became a fire. so it happened on monday in the north of the country near the border with nas. yeah, for other people may have been kidnapped. troops have been deployed to an area under search is now on the way those headlines. this one you see later on, the stream is coming up next. me

. ah ah ah. i a semi ok to day on the street. we unpack the controversial practice of calvin offsetting is while a company or a country tries to counteract the greenhouse gases that they were meeting by funding the reduction of emissions elsewhere. it sounds pretty simple, right, but he's a little bit more complicated than that. so many issues to talk about that stopped at the stock home environment in cities. so the 1st thing to keep in mind about

carbon offsetting is that the world cannot offset its way out of climate change. companies, organizations, and countries need to focus 1st on reducing their own emissions. second, a lot of the challenges with carbon offsetting arise, because so many buyers are focused on achieving carbon neutrality or ned 0. we missions for themselves. and i think we need to move away from this idea. think less about achieving your own net 0 and more about where you can contribute to global net 0. that's what derrick has to say. let's see what i guess have to say hello ma'am. hello. yes. hello, she she, they get to happy. a man, please introduce yourself di, international audience. my name is mary, are fun. i am a science reporter, a box, and i focus on climate change. yet to hattie yet say hello to i, should i so audience? tell them who you are and what you do. hello everyone. my name is yes. i am

currently be executive director of greenpeace, in southeast asia. and i like myself recovering climate negotiator. i was a chief negotiator for the philippines for many years. thank you. you have i had this conversation, isn't he triggering for you? i like that scene to nice to have him. please introduce yourself to ass stream audience. anyone. and i'm switching to letty and i am the chief of staff of the office of fossil energy and carbon management at the united states department of energy. right, gas, i'm going to put it to work straight away. there are certain phrases that already popped up into this conversation. we have of all the time when we, when we use the climate crises as a, as a point of discussion, i'm going to get you to unpack them in 2 sentences or less. let me start with next 0 mat. you take nexium, right? sure. net 0 is the idea that you can achieve greenhouse gas emissions that are zeroed out so that when you produce something, you compensate for it in another place or in another way, hobbin neutrality,

sushi. sure, as i'm carbon neutrality, isn't it state of being at 0. and so as a mere said, when you try and compensate for something, when you reach that state, it's called hybrid vitro. thank you so much and carbon of sense. yep. he said that one. yes, carbon off, sad thing is about, you know, being for someone else to reduce or remove the carbon that you produce while you continue, in fact, pumping it into the atmosphere. and i like, i like it to some one going to church on sundays so that i can go being seen full from monday to saturday. i say yes as go our conversation to will study. there is the debate. if you're new tube right now, the comment section is open for you. we are asking about carbon offsetting the you and climate conference is happening right now. how can you, how can carbon offsetting, how can it help our global climate emergency? can it help our global climate emergency your thoughts right here, and hopefully i'll be out to put them on to the show. all right,

so i'm trying to think of how carbon offsetting might work. and for that, i went to a company called cool effect. they've got different areas that you can look up. we've got air travel, driving accommodations cruising, and they tell you how much carbon you're using up. so let's take a flight. let's take a flight that's going to take us 7 to 9 hours. we're using $1.00 tons of carbon, and that if i wanted to pay for that, that is $15.50. i have offset the carbon or have i am air. it really depends on the quality of the offset that you're using. and that's the main contention here, not all offsets are created equal and it really depends on the level of accounting and the level of accountability that you have for that offset. and so generally i tend to be very skeptical when someone promises that degree of precision. so the

saying $1.00 tons can be compensated by spending $15.30 or something like that. so there are mechanisms that are a little bit more controversial, things like ecosystem restoration, things like restoring forest. the idea is if you replanting area of degraded forest as it grows over time, it takes in carbon dioxide and stores it such that your total balance is 0. and that's really controversial for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that it's really hard to keep track of. and many of the offsets that we've used so far have failed to produce results when they're actually measure. so i'm looking at how business of carbon offsetting right now, and i could pay money. i could pay money right here on the show to somebody to offset my the ways i'm moving around the world and maybe using up carbon producing carbon, i should really say, is that an ethical issue with that? see cheese dod? sure. i think it really depends. again, on the quality and location of where these offsets are happening. i think,

you know, we really need to pay attention to the global south and understanding kind of where some of these projects lie. i think when we, when we think about our project happening somewhere in the global south understanding that we're transferring the liability of those emissions elsewhere is, is deeply problematic. and so we really need to evaluate, you know, what we're taking into account and how these projects are being managed and how they're affecting communities, where they're located. i want to play a teen wrap gelatine mining. she's the vice president and director of partnerships cool effect. i was just on her website just a moment ago. would you have a listen to jealousy and then respond to her premise? his yes, we do believe the reducing emissions is absolutely the most important piece of di carbon is ation. however, every business and individual, regardless of how much they reduce, we'll still have emissions that are unavailable. and that's where high quality

carbon offsets can come in as a useful tool to help people reduce their emissions and compensate in a way that is actually benefiting those. and local communities, a high quality carbon offset, and presented with price transparency and is fully monitored and scientifically verified. can be transformative to a local community. yes, i think i heard a lot of things i wanted to hear in terms of how i'm going off since my work. and i think the quality of those all since it includes the bars the verifiability of those offsets. but i still think that it's a, it's a, it's a tricky business because what, what, what we're dealing with here is the climate emergency. and there's just basically no time last time, not enough time for us to indulge in offsets. when in the real things that needs to

be done is, is absolute, the emissions reductions offsetting in this particular case. even if they are high quality, all sense. it's a big distraction from what needs to be done and where the would be escalating impacts of climate change. there's just simply no time for that. america had, well to pick up on that point. i mean the, to the definition we gave earlier about net 0. you know, absolute reductions or the contrast in point to that. so net 0 is where you emit and then compensate for it. whereas the absolute reduction is where you stop emitting in the 1st place. and as you have said, that you know, that is the most beneficial thing to do. it has a lot of co benefits. so if you prevent c o 2 from going into the or you also reduce local pollution. but also because climate change is a problem, not just in space, but in time, that means that you know, the actions that we take now will resonate for decades for centuries. and so that's why you need to have upfront emissions reductions. and that's the problem with offset is that it can delay those upfront emissions reductions. i'm sure i'm just

wondering, does the science actually, what is a science? they're always still debating the science. i think we're having trouble to really understanding the accounting and so you know, from the perspective of the us government and from department of energy, you know, we think that anything that can be carbonized now should be any non fossil option should be chosen where that's feasible and the tricky part here is when we think about these hardest city carbon dissect, ition shipping and how we really think about what that 0 means in the context of those sectors that might not be able to hit 0 emissions at that time. and i think that's one carbon dioxide removal comes into play, to really address those hardest to carbonate pieces. but i really, you know, agree with the point that for everything we can to carbonite now we should, and i don't think that means for a specific business. i think that means economy wide and we have to be really careful about not looking at individual companies and allowing them to not be

carbonized what they can because offsets are available gas help me on some what we could de carbon eyes. now if we had the will to do it, she stop. what can we do now? immediately? i mean, if, if you look at a natural gas power plant, you know, we can put carbon capture and storage on that plant. that power plant should not be buying offsets elsewhere to, you know, quote unquote counter balance those emissions. now when you, but i think you're the contrast there is if you look at something like ation. now you can think about sustainable aviation fuels, but those might not be, you know, deployable by 2050, you know, throughout the whole sector. and that's something that we will need to offset to, to get in. it's your 2050. what can we do? carbon eyes now. absolutely. now today this small, this year. yeah. l, the, the biggest sector that needs the carbon station is the electricity production sector. and that happens to be the biggest culprit for climate change. so we need

a massive rapid transition forward. the carbonite, seeing all, all electricity power plans and the transport sector definitely comes in 2nd. so the transition is happening. it's exciting. and we need to embrace it. whether it's, whether it's new technology that allows us to move people in good in the more environment friendly way and climb, expand the way or, or must transport systems are making the more livable and lovable. we have to do that. that is an imperative way that we find that price is making for putting so much on on this issue. i'm just looking here at a headline from the guardian new zealand plan to have greenhouse gas emissions criticized as an accounting trick. i, i'm still sort of on the fence whether carbon of setting is a scam or not. like paying someone else to do your how works. so you haven't done. yeah, i what have you. right, and that is the contention, especially when we're talking about climate change as

a global issue. we know that for instance, some countries have contributed more to the problem than others. but the countries that stand to suffer the most from rising average temperatures are the ones that contributed kids to the problems to countries like, uh, that are islands or on coastal areas that are vulnerable to sea level rise. they didn't really cause this problem, but they stand to suffer from it and seen wealthier countries like new zealand like the united states, effectively by their way out of the problem, you know, fundamentally propagates that injustice. and so that's why a lot of f advocates and activists are very critical of this, that these wealthy countries have the resources and should be targeting absolute reductions 1st before they start doing these offsets. and that's really where they need to prioritize. and that's where they should be scrutinized 1st. i'm just looking at some of that the conversation on each of i'm going to share it with you yet. i start with you. a sammy says this is an elitist scheme. the pull will pick up the burden and the wealthy corporations and countries will get away with anything yet thoughts. oh, absolutely. this is not justify on this issue. it's,

it's way beyond anesha accounting and technical feasibility. if he's at its core a justice issue, why as a mirror correctly pointed out, the climate problem is the problem that is here because of the emissions merely from the industrialized nations. and now they're asking for nations to host all of this offset being projects. and these injustices are, in fact magnified and deepened by a central flaw offset the allows the biggest polio 31 or if the late and distract from reducing their own emissions. and while we celebrate, you know, the most significant feature of the various agreement when countries agree that we would want to keep both temperature eyes below 1.5 degrees, collecting shared mission. but what they're, what we're seeing now is thousands of companies announced all of these net 0 nan, 0 plans, but their failing to grass the enormity of the transformation that these required.

and this is not just about the emissions per se, but the climate crisis is offering us an opportunity to transform. they cannot make order and we're failing to see that a camera thought see she chain from from you chief over one says of that scam, all the scabs around right now. i mean there are, and i think, you know, there are frameworks that don't have verifiable. removals, and we don't have a framework in which there's public oversight and i think when it comes to defining what a high quality offset is and what we really want that to look like, that's the role of the government. we are meant it regulations and oversight over what we think will actually provide benefit because that's our purpose. it's to provide benefit and to address the climate crisis. and so when we think about creating a system, you know that, that takes a really robust federal government approach to create, you know,

accountability to create body, train, reporting and verification to verify permanence. and you really can't do that without robust government infrastructure. amar, emma, a seems like this is that she just, quite chaotic is an idea that technically works theoretically works, but doesn't in practice, no regulation, no oversight is fallen tree can do what you like. don't nessie have to call your emissions impacting the level sal. this is a whole list of things, a reasons why people should not trust common offsetting when well on all those things are true, but at the same time, in some respects they may be a necessary evil. now we can have officer come up with a scenario where, okay, say we have a country that does make every absolute reduction that they possibly can upfront, but say they still need to travel, they still need to have a be a sion as a sector. then as a last resort, a high quality carbon offset might make sense,

in which case you could use that. you know, the question is, what is the alternative? i think it would be better to take money for somebody that's willing to spend it and use it to do something that's beneficial to the climate rather than, than sitting all that money and doing nothing. but that only makes sense in that specific circumstance when you've exhausted all other options. so possibly as a last resort that may make sense. now we have seen, you know, that as a, so she was mentioning, you know, we need a lot of accountability and oversight. and it's really been the wild west out here as far as offset, you know, the world has tried to use offsets before in previous climate agreements, namely under the kyoto protocol. and, you know, the credits that were created under that mechanism were really deeply flawed. and there are still countries that are still trying to use and trade those credits now . and that's also been something of a, of a disruption that's been a distraction in these climate negotiations. and so yeah, we really do need a lot of international coordination, not just government coordination at the federal level, but across borders to make sure everybody is playing by the same rules. nobody's

trying to hide there and or any trying any kind of accounting gimmicks. and that, of course is really hard to do. i, yes, it was like a fast. i think it's also how we, you know, define offset. and so when you, when you look at the type of project, we want to make sure that risk is taken into account here. and so, you know, as i mentioned, forestry is a really big part of how often are currently in the market. but if we look at different types of carbon removal that you know isn't available today but, but will be in the future. those are lower risk projects that lead to permanent removal. how can we make sure that, you know, assets are done in a way that is just and is accountable? i think. but how can i, how can we? and i think that, i think that's where the risk question comes into play. and i think that's a government come into play. how are we defining and are we defining through projects that have high risk and you know, verify ability for permanence or we tuning projects that we know will lead to permanent at the government is helping deploy. and so we know we're doing an

adjusted sustainable way, and that's the goal. i'm going to channel my in a know it, because i'm wondering how much is a carbon credit was a man it really depends on the market that you're in. you know, there's a voluntary carbon market, you know, there where people can choose to buy carbon credits and offsets for their activities, but they're also mandatory, or there are compliance markets as well. so basically, there are parts of the world like the european union that actually have a cap and trade scheme in place where basically countries are on balance limited in their greenhouse gas emissions. but then they can trade with other countries if they can't hit their own cap. and in those places than you see carbon credits fluctuating with market prices. it's almost like a stock. and so they can drop really low, become very cheap, or they can get really expensive. and the idea is, in those kinds of situations, carbon credits will get expensive over time and forced people to make absolute reductions in emissions that eventually there will be an upper limit to how much

you can afford to simply offset your emissions. in the ideal scenario, in practice, carbon credits, even in these kinds of compliance markets have been so cheap that they've really been excused to continue polluting and not delivered the reductions that we've been hoping for. anything in a new voice to our conversation. this is tiara laguna, who's the environment and human rights policy advisor, amnesty international. this is what she told us. a few hours idea. we must treat she and ceiling is since not never seen. the house is on fire and we cannot rely on carbon offsetting to continue burning fossil fuels, pulsing fuels and incompatible with you much rights. and then continued burning. we leads to live stating in cuts of climate change from people that out towards in glasgow. states suits adopt clear plans to face out foresee few ins, enrolls that allow forbes entering the research reductions and guarantee shades too often capable of setting projects have resulted in human rights violations. for

example, indigenous peoples being dispossessed of their lands, or even kids in the process of peaceful opposing some projects, we must not allow this to continue. so kiara is in glasgow at the un climate conference right now. and remember to share with you a tweet from yet. if you're at cop $26.00, beware of the carbon of setting lies being paddled there. got 26 basics. why refused to collude with the polluters in the carbon offsetting lie? what are the lies yet? oh, there is tons of flies and one to one of the most important things is that it is, it is being heralded as a magic one. it is not a magic wand, it is definitely not going to solve the climate. and if it is over it being oversold as a solution to climate change by saying that, you know, we need market forces to solve the find the l it's, it's the market forces that,

that brought us into this bias within the 1st place. and also being angry with kara, and i'm happy that she mentioned the entire horror of this problem is how human rights are being violated. and one of those life is that the global side is going to benefit from all of these all setting projects. well, all setting us long and well documented is 30 of problems, not just in terms of how they deliver gen when benefit for the climate, but a long history of negative impacts or land drives, social justice for marginalized communities, and also for biodiversity in many countries. and what, what, what the, what is least not understood well here is that these are all sense. they're going to happen mostly in the global south as she was, she are actually pointed out earlier. we were really concerned that many of the historic problems that have happened with all of this off setting projects and you

know, the broader risk of undermining the climate goals is it will be exacerbated by the growing corporate and political enthusiasm or all of this margaret initiative and got the snappy st distraction from what needs to be done as we keep saying and, and the heart of beer. so scared out emphasizes the fossil fuel industry. and, and i'm, i'm a gosh with the notion that the fossil fuel industry wants to offset mission. if i even set aside my my, this belief about offsets and let's say it can work technically, i think for us projects, meaning all of this offset where we, we have to plant trees to offset the emissions from the fossil fuel industry. it's just an acceptable for me. i would say that we should focus, for example, on, on solar power on renewable energy. and those things are easier to found. and

therefore, we can avoid those, like we have how is this different from climate financing? why isn't carbon affecting climate financing? o climate financing is, is a broader term that may include some financing that goes into carbon trading and also there for a carbon off sending well climate financing by it's strict definition under the un time is convention is, is financial resources, money that should be provided by reach increase, or what is listed us next to countries of the climate convention to developing countries poorer countries war at the receiving end of the climate impacts so that they can also lead from into a cleaner kind of development and also adapt to the impacts of climate change that is an obligation under the u. n. climate convention and the fires agreement. that's

also made it very clear that developed countries need to mobilize as much as, while at least $100000000.00 per year. by 2020, 2025. we're talking about money here that needs to be used to generate that kind of transition and that kind of transformation towards cleaner development and also allow countries to call while we the impacts of climate change is climate finance. ben with about offsets, this is not real climate finance because what we're, what we're talking about here is this is basically money being thrown at the problem is not money being, being used to solve the problem. we could talk more about this, but we are almost at the end of today's show. i want to cite and yet, and she she and also you for your very incisive questions and thoughts about compet affecting and is it genuinely a way to tackle our climate crisis? i think the answer is it depends. and if it's done well,

you can follow. i guess on twitter i will look here on my laptop. this is a man. this is yet the recovering highway negotiator. and this is teaching. thanks to watching everybody. i saw next time. ah, ah. ah go where no one has gone before and a trail will be left behind between the sounds of paw in the whisperings

of a few acres of truth will be heard confronting power with courage and lighting the dark shadows. 2 in 4, and in spite were even if we climb up the mountain, we still walk on our own path. a unique path they just said, and it's time for a different approach. one that is going to challenge the way you thing from international politics to the global pandemic, and everything in between. upfront with me, mark lamont, who on out 0 november, oh, now 205 years after the historic piece deal between fox rebels and the colombian government, out to sierra examined y tensions and violence of rising. once again. emma, you award winning pool flies investigates the untold stories across the us,

millions in coast on boat in parliamentary elections under a new constitution. and more than a year after the last poll triggered a political crisis. the mercy of personal short documentary africa direct showcases african stories from african filmmakers, china marks 100 days until it host the winter olympics. but how will the pandemic include for a boycott, impact the sporting event november on out jazeera ah hello, i'm marianne marcy and london clayton. okay. main stories now and ethiopian government is declared a nation wide state of emergency is fighting against the to crime. rebels continues coming on the eve of a years since fighting 1st broke out in the northern region. fight to say they're now in control of 2 towns on a major highway leading to the federal capital. and there are concerns the situation. good. escalate would be to grab people's liberation front. joining

forces with another arm group, the rama liberation army, the u. s. envoy to the horn of africa as called for an end to the fighting.