Letters to the Editor: Of course ‘net zero’ carbon offsets aren’t working. They don’t reduce emissions

A grove of burned trees, one bearing a sign that says "End"
Trees along a road leading to one of the carbon offset areas purchased by oil companies near Vann, Calif.
(Carolyn Cole / Los Angeles Times)

To the editor: Thank you for the eye-opening op-ed article on California’s carbon-offset forests. But I take issue with this statement: “Once they have a clear-eyed view of how forest offsets work … policymakers should consider investing in other climate-mitigation measures.”

Trying to suck up the carbon as we release it is not a solution. Instead, we should reduce the carbon we produce in the first place. The author mentions renewable energy and electrification, which are desperately needed, but carbon pricing and similar solutions have been demonstrated to be highly and immediately effective, and they don’t rely on voluntary compliance.

Let’s keep planting and protecting trees for all their other benefits — clean air, habitat protection, heat island effect defense, our own love of nature and more — but forests are not the solution to the carbon problem.


Jessie Warme, Reseda


To the editor: This opinion piece causes this citizen to feel enormously played by our nation’s elites.

How is it that those who caused such an enormous problem as climate change are allowed as major consultants to its solution? This was a clear political rollover for wealthy interests from the get-go, and all involved knew it.

If The Times wishes to be useful, it will ferret out all involved. Poor climate ecology kills millions.

D.J. Ponder, Torrance