What a News Story Reveals About What a “Real” Carbon Credit Is
A recent human-interest news story described an absurd situation:
a child had not yet been born, but the name was already registered; the living conditions were not yet prepared, yet publicity had already begun.
In parenting news, this sounds ridiculous.In carbon markets, however, the same logic is increasingly being sold as innovation.
In several high-profile carbon project narratives today, carbon credits have not yet been issued—none exist in any official registry—yet tokens, “natural asset” claims, and RWA-style financial stories are already circulating. This is no longer a question of aggressive marketing. It is a question of institutional misalignment.
If the carbon credit does not yet exist, what exactly is being sold?
1. The Benchmark Has Always Been There: NDC Is Not Background Noise
To understand what constitutes a real carbon credit, the starting point is not a pitch deck, but the Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC).
Under the framework of the UNFCCC, every country has formally submitted its NDC. This means governments have already declared:
- which sectors will reduce emissions,
- which forests and lands will absorb carbon,
- at what scale and over what timeframe,
- and that these outcomes count toward national targets.
This is not a vision statement.
It is a sovereign commitment.
2. The Current Reality Is Clear:
Today’s “Net Removals” Belong to the NDC
Whether we are talking about:
- natural forest carbon sequestration,
- government-led protection, restoration, or afforestation,
- or forest management already required by law,
all resulting net removals are, by default, part of the national NDC.
Unless there is an explicit authorization, registry recognition, and corresponding adjustment (CA), these outcomes are:
- not corporate assets,
- not private property,
- and not tradable mitigation outcomes.
This point is not optional.
Without acknowledging it, all downstream carbon-credit narratives collapse.
3. When Can a Private Carbon Credit Legitimately Exist?
The answer is simple—and extremely strict:
You must do better than what the government is already doing.
“Better” here does not mean better storytelling or bigger numbers. It means demonstrable facts that withstand regulatory scrutiny:
- the outcome would not have occurred under existing policy,
- it is not mandated by law,
- it is not already counted toward the national NDC.
This is additionality above the NDC baseline, not below it, and not parallel to it.
4. Why This Line Matters
If a project does not exceed what the state has already committed to do, yet still issues credits or financial instruments, the result is straightforward:
- public mitigation outcomes are privatized,
- the same tonne of CO₂ is claimed twice,
- structural double counting is created.
Under the Paris Agreement architecture, this is not a grey area.
It is a red line.
5. Returning to the News Metaphor
A child not yet born, but already registered.
A carbon credit not yet issued, but already financialized.
The forest is still under validation.
The tokens are already circulating.
This is not about whether a project might succeed in the future.
It is about selling possibility as if it were already an asset.
That is not climate finance foresight.
It is the premature monetization of public climate governance outcomes.
6. One Sentence That Defines a Real Carbon Credit
A real carbon credit is not defined by what you claim to do,
but by whether you can prove that—without you—the government could not have achieved that outcome, and that the government explicitly agrees to allocate that portion to you.
As long as the NDC benchmark exists,
any carbon narrative that avoids this question— no matter how large the tonnage, how long the timeframe, or how sophisticated the financial packaging— is ultimately just a competition in storytelling.
https://asiatimes.com/2026/01/chintai-majv-28bn-tokenization-tests-new-development-finance-model/
