Return to The paradox of carbon credits
Move to 13. The Avoidance paradox <> Move to 15. The Standards paradox

This paradox focuses on a question that has haunted carbon markets since their inception: We all want “scientifically proven” results. The problem is, science evolves.

Science isn’t about absolutes. It’s about a preponderance of the evidence and concurrence of experts, especially when you have social sciences layered on top of physical sciences, as is the case with forest-carbon methodologies. So, what happens if the “cutting-edge” science behind a project turns out to be less than perfect?

A decade ago, precise satellite data was rare—now, it’s routine, and that data is multiplying like tribbles on the deck of the Starship Enterprise, leading to ever-better models. 

We’re always chasing perfection, but that creates a paradox: holding out for flawless, scientifically “correct” methods could freeze progress altogether, as fear of future criticism keeps projects from launching.

How to deal with the Science Paradox?

In this series, two leading authorities in carbon uncover the secrets and contradictions of an entire industry – in the most fun and engaging way. Through 24 curated Carbon Paradoxes, you'll learn everything essential about this field, starting with the tensions we must address to make environmental markets thrive.

This article is also published on carbonparadox.org. illuminem Voices is a democratic space presenting the thoughts and opinions of leading Sustainability & Energy writers, their opinions do not necessarily represent those of illuminem.