PARIS: The United Nations announced Thursday the approval of the first carbon credits under a global market aimed at reducing emissions, a mechanism that has faced scrutiny over greenwashing concerns. The UN-run market, established under the Paris climate accord, allows companies and countries to offset their excess emissions by financing projects that cut greenhouse gases in other nations. Critics fear that if set up poorly, such schemes can undermine the world&#39;s efforts to curb global warming by allowing countries or companies to greenwash &mdash; or overstate &mdash; their emissions reductions. The first credits issued under the new carbon market involve a project in Myanmar that distributes efficient wood-burning cook stoves that reduce harmful household air pollution and ease pressure on local forests, the UN&#39;s climate agency said. Implemented in partnership with a South Korean company, the project will generate credits that will count towards the climate targets of South Korea and Myanmar. The UN climate agency said the credited emissions reductions are 40%&nbsp;lower than under a previous scheme as more conservative calculations are applied under the new Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism (PACM). &quot;Our focus is on building confidence in this market from the outset, and this first issuance shows that the system is working as intended,&quot; Jacqui Ruesga, vice chair of the UN body supervising the PACM, said in a statement. More than two billion people around the world cook using open fires or inefficient stoves fueled by kerosene, coal or biomass such as wood, crop waste or dung, according to the World Health Organization. The resulting air pollution kills millions of people each year. The stoves in the Myanmar project burn woody biomass more efficiently, meaning it needs less fuel and spews far less smoke inside the home. But at current rates, only 78% of the population is expected to have access to clean cooking by 2030, the WHO said. &quot;Clean cooking protects health, saves forests, cuts emissions and helps empower women and girls, who are typically hardest hit by household air pollution,&quot; UN climate chief Simon Stiell said. &quot;The opportunities presented by this UN carbon market across all regions are vast, particularly now that strong environmental safeguards, robust standards, and a clear system for redress are in place to ensure integrity, inclusiveness and efficiency,&quot; he said. The 2015 Paris Agreement, which commits the world to limiting warming to well below 2C and ideally at 1.5C, also envisaged that countries could take part in cross-border trade of carbon reductions. New rules were agreed at the UN&#39;s COP29 climate summit in Azerbaijan in 2024 for the carbon market mechanism. At the time, Greenpeace said the agreement left loopholes that would allow fossil fuel companies to continue polluting. But other environmentalists said that, while not perfect, it provided some clarity that was absent from global efforts to regulate carbon credits.

Smoke Stacks. (Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division, Farm Security Administration/Office of War Information Color Photographs.)

Climate

The UN-run market, established under the Paris climate accord, allows companies and countries to offset their excess emissions by financing projects that cut greenhouse gases in other nations.

UN approves first carbon credits under Paris Agreement

Web Desk

At the Wall Street Journal&#39;s Innovator Awards, Billie Eilish delivered a stark challenge to the wealthy elite, asking pointedly, &quot;If you&#39;re a billionaire, why are you a billionaire?&quot; Her words came moments after announcing an $11.5 million donation from her tour to support climate justice and food equity, crystallizing a generational divide that goes far beyond celebrity posturing. The contrast between Eilish and Taylor Swift epitomizes this divide. While Eilish designs sustainable tours with plant-based catering and biodegradable confetti, Swift&#39;s private jet logged 170 flights in 2022, generating an estimated 8,300 tonnes of CO2 emissions, roughly 1,200 times the average person&#39;s annual carbon footprint. A single flight from Tokyo to Las Vegas for the Super Bowl emitted 40 tonnes of carbon, with her Eras Tour generating 139 metric tonnes during its US and South American legs. Swift&#39;s representatives argue that she purchases more than twice the number of carbon credits needed to offset her travel. But climate experts repeatedly note that carbon offsets are fundamentally flawed &mdash; often unverifiable, sometimes fraudulent, and incapable of undoing atmospheric damage. The only real solution, they insist, is to simply fly less. This isn&#39;t merely a celebrity spat, but a broader generational reckoning about wealth, responsibility, and planetary survival. Eilish, born in 2001, represents a generation that experiences climate anxiety as background noise. This cohort watched Greta Thunberg sail across the Atlantic rather than fly, viewing sustainability not as a brand, but as an existential necessity. Swift, born in 1989, comes from an era when private jets were status symbols, not sources of shame. The underlying issue cuts deeper than individual carbon footprints. It&#39;s about a system that allows extreme wealth accumulation while the planet suffers. Eilish&#39;s generation increasingly sees through the performative gestures of wealthy individuals &mdash; understanding that no one truly needs a billion dollars and that such wealth could solve massive global problems rather than fund private jet junkets. Celebrity behavior shapes cultural norms, and when Swift flies private for convenience, she normalizes a fundamentally unsustainable lifestyle. When Eilish questions the very existence of billionaires, she challenges the premise that extreme wealth accumulation is morally neutral. The climate crisis demands more than individual action; it requires a complete reimagining of societal values. Carbon offsetting has become the refuge of wealthy polluters, a corporate indulgence that allows the rich to buy the right to pollute while the poor suffer the consequences of a warming planet they did little to create. Eilish&#39;s approach differs dramatically: Her tour sustainability measures are systematic, not performative, acknowledging that having a massive platform comes with a responsibility to minimize harm. The uncomfortable truth remains: The planet is burning. Some are trying to put out the fire, while others are adding fuel and calling it innovation. When Eilish asks why billionaires exist, she&#39;s articulating what her generation increasingly takes for granted: Extreme wealth is indefensible when the planet is in crisis. Swift could choose differently. She could tour sustainably, fly commercial, or simply fly less. She could donate a fraction of her estimated $1.6 billion net worth to climate causes. Instead, she buys carbon credits and sends cease-and-desist letters to students tracking her flights. Meanwhile, Eilish keeps asking the questions no one in that room of billionaires wants to answer. And the planet keeps burning.

Blogs

Billie Eilish challenges billionaire wealth and celebrity hypocrisy on climate action, contrasting her sustainable, charitable approach with Taylor Swift’s heavy private jet emissions and questionable carbon offsets.

Articles tagged with "carbon footprint"

UN approves first carbon credits under Paris Agreement

Two generations, one planet: Billie Eilish and Taylor Swift's divergent climate paths

UN approves first carbon credits under Paris Agreement