MAX Carbon climate projects

Yes. These Plan Vivo projects focus on the reforestation of degraded landscapes, sequestering carbon in the process. Sometimes, trees are felled at specific times to give the landholders timber for use as long term building materials. After felling, a new tree is planted in its place and complete regrowth can occur in just 20 years. The whole system is managed and continuously monitored to ensure it meets the Plan Vivo standard. The climate benefit, management system and economic records also receive a third-party audit at least every 5 years.

We can never be certain that the trees will definitely be standing in centuries to come, however everything is done to incentivize the landholders to keep the trees. The species planted and the agroforestry systems used are selected to give long term benefits way after the carbon payments and contract end. For example, the fruit trees that have been sequestering carbon will be providing large harvests of fruit and the native trees growing in coffee plantations provide the optimum amount of shade for top quality and high yield coffee beans. The only way to keep trees standing is to make them more valuable standing than cut down.

Risks of fire, drought, and other extreme weather events are unfortunately becoming more frequent and severe as our planet warms. But these are risks we are all well aware of and they are taken into account at every step of project development and implementation. 20% of carbon stored by all Pan Vivo projects is not sold and kept in a ‘buffer’ to act as an insurance carbon stock for if any unexpected events occur.

Depending on the species, It takes approximately 20-40 years for a tree to become fully grown in these projects. Meanwhile, the effect of anthropogenic emissions are calculated based on their impact over a hundred-year period, a method that has been decided and agreed upon by the UNFCCC. This means that the timescales for tree growth and emission measurement overlap by at least 80 years and thus claiming to have offset today is reasonable. As the trees grow, they also contribute to climate adaptation and ecosystem services in the vulnerable places the projects operate in.

No. The small scale farmers who participate in Plan Vivo do so voluntarily and make the best decisions for their own land. Before the project starts, project developers create a land use plan to ensure their needs are met. In addition, some species which give the land holder carbon payments also produce food, and those that don’t produce food increase the yield of other crops so these projects are more likely to increase food security than decrease it.

No. By purchasing carbon credits, MAX is taking direct responsibility for its emissions, while simultaneously working to reduce its climate impact. The most recent IPCC report shows that only reducing emissions is no longer enough, we must also remove warming gasses from the atmosphere. Everyone must do as much as they can to contribute to mitigating climate change. If MAX had not purchased these credits, the cumulative emissions in the atmosphere would be higher.

An important criterion for assessing whether carbon projects are beneficial about if the climate benefit is additional or would these actions have happened anyway? In all standards for carbon projects, there are criteria directed at addressing this issue. The Plan Vivo projects MAX invests in can be seen to have high additionality, especially as some of the beneficiaries of the projects are living below the poverty line. The money MAX gives to these projects can do a long way, making real difference to people’s daily lives and enabling them to mitigate and adapt to climate change.