Understanding Carbon Credits: A Complete Contrast to Carbon Footprints
Although Thais have become more aware of carbon credits and hope they will become a new source of income for farmers, the reality is that Thailand still faces several challenges. One major issue is the widespread misunderstanding of what carbon credits truly are—especially among government agencies. This has led to farmers having unrealistic expectations of earning significant income from carbon credits, resulting in some being misled. Worse yet, some have attempted to establish their own standards, which could have long-term negative effects on both farmers and the country, despite the existence of internationally accepted standards.
Jirawat Tangkitngamwong, President of the Thai Timber Trade Association and an executive at Deesawat Industries, who has been deeply involved with carbon credits for many years, explains the fundamental difference between carbon footprints and carbon credits—a common source of confusion.
To simplify, carbon footprints can be referred to as “sin points” because every activity on Earth leaves a carbon dioxide trace. The amount varies depending on the activity—for example, driving to the market emits some carbon, but industrial factories generate significantly larger carbon footprints.
Greenhouse gases that contribute to carbon footprints include carbon dioxide (CO₂), methane (CH₄), nitrous oxide (N₂O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulfur hexafluoride (SF₆), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF₃). These gases directly contribute to global warming and are collectively referred to as greenhouse gases, measured in terms of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO₂e).
On the other hand, carbon credits can be thought of as “merit points.” However, these merit points are meaningless unless they are verified by experts. A project must be assessed and certified to confirm that it actively removes or captures greenhouse gases, converting them into tradeable carbon credits. If the verification body is recognized globally, these credits can be sold on the market. Companies with high “sin points” can purchase “merit points” to offset their carbon footprint and achieve carbon neutrality.
One sustainable method of reducing carbon footprints is planting trees. Trees naturally absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere through photosynthesis, releasing oxygen while storing carbon in their trunks, branches, and roots. As a result, every plant—whether short-lived or long-lived—has the potential to generate carbon credits.
All plants inherently store carbon, contributing to environmental sustainability. Certified carbon credits from trees can be accumulated over ten years, starting from the project’s initiation, regardless of how long the trees have already been planted. Once the ten-year period ends, the same trees cannot be counted for carbon credits again—new trees must be planted to generate additional credits. In this sense, trading carbon credits from trees is similar to trading gold: one can wait for the value to rise before selling. The larger and more widespread the branches, the more carbon they can absorb. For short-lived plants, eligibility depends on accepted standards, but alternative measures exist.
“In reality, buying carbon credits does not reduce carbon emissions. Instead, it redistributes income from those who contribute to pollution to those who actively help the environment. This financial support encourages local communities and farmers to plant more trees, ultimately benefiting the planet. Carbon credits should be seen as a bonus rather than a primary source of income. Moreover, local Thai carbon credit standards hold little value on the global market and are unlikely to fetch high prices, as they are not internationally recognized. Currently, carbon credit implementation remains voluntary in Thailand, while many other countries have already made it a mandatory practice.”
CR. Thai Rath
