After nearly a decade of debate, negotiators at the COP29 climate conference in Baku have reached an agreement on global carbon trading rules.

This new deal aims to establish a system where countries and companies can purchase carbon credits to offset greenhouse gas emissions, theoretically contributing to their net-zero goals.

While the agreement is seen by some as a vital step towards certainty in carbon offsetting and could potentially channel billions into environmental initiatives, significant flaws remain.

Critics, including the Climate Land Ambition and Rights Alliance, warn that the rules could lead to 'double counting' of carbon credits and fail to protect vulnerable communities.

These shortcomings have been consistently debated at past COP meetings, and were not fully resolved in Baku.

The newly defined Paris Agreement Trading Mechanism has been criticized for its approach to carbon removal, especially regarding the permanence of carbon storage.

Current methods primarily depend on forests and soils, offering only temporary carbon sequestration compared to geological storage solutions.

This issue is heightened by recent reports indicating a reduction in carbon absorption by natural ecosystems due to climate-induced droughts and wildfires.

Despite chances to strengthen the rules, the agreed-upon standards appear insufficient to handle fossil fuel emissions' longevity.

As the United Nations prepares to roll out a centralized carbon trading registry next year, countries like Australia are encouraged to reconsider land-based offsets for emissions from major sectors.

Additionally, there is a call to revise national carbon trading frameworks and refocus on emissions reduction over carbon removals as compensatory measures.

The debate over effective carbon trading strategies reflects a broader struggle in aligning international climate policy with scientific recommendations.