Kaleigh Harrison
Wildfires are rapidly changing the narrative around forest-based carbon offsets. A recent United Nations University study challenges the longstanding assumption that tree-planting is a straightforward path to carbon neutrality. With Canada’s 2023 wildfire season releasing roughly 2 gigatonnes of CO₂—six times the national 20-year average—it’s clear that forests can shift from climate assets to liabilities under stress.
Yet the voluntary carbon market, now nearing a $100 billion valuation, continues to function on outdated models that treat forests as static carbon sinks. This disconnect poses risks not only to the climate but also to corporate sustainability portfolios that rely heavily on forest-based credits.
Dr. Ju Hyoung Lee from UNU-INWEH, who led the study, emphasizes that increased drought and heat stress in forest ecosystems are accelerating their transformation into “carbon bombs.” Despite this, many offset programs still approve projects in fire-prone zones without adequate fire risk assessments or forward-looking environmental data.
What’s often overlooked is how forest expansion in warming areas can actually worsen fire conditions. Larger forest coverage in dry climates can increase local heat absorption and reduce albedo, amplifying warming and drying cycles—making the risk of combustion even higher. These oversights mean that businesses may be investing in offsets that could emit rather than absorb carbon, with little warning.
Satellite Monitoring: A Necessary Shift Toward Risk-Aware Offsets
The solution isn’t to abandon forest carbon offsets but to evolve them—starting with how risk is assessed and managed. Satellite-based monitoring platforms offer a data-driven way forward. Technologies from satellites like MODIS, SMOS, and SMAP are now capable of identifying moisture stress, fuel load accumulation, and declining forest health—all of which can forecast fire risk.
These tools allow companies to move from reactive forest management to a more proactive, risk-informed approach. By integrating satellite insights, businesses can identify which regions are too volatile for long-term sequestration projects and shift investment toward more resilient zones.
Real-time soil moisture tracking, pest outbreak detection, and even thermal pattern analysis offer a window into the shifting conditions that determine a forest’s carbon balance. Incorporating this intelligence into carbon market protocols can help ensure that credits reflect actual, durable carbon reductions.
Initiatives such as the Global Wildland Fire Network and the Global Fire Management Hub could serve as foundations for embedding this technology into existing carbon frameworks. The goal is a more transparent and accurate system—where offset value aligns with on-the-ground climate realities.
The Business Case for Adaptive Carbon Strategy
For corporate climate leaders, this means rethinking offset procurement as a due diligence process. Instead of valuing projects by the volume of trees planted, companies should examine local hydrology, fire history, soil conditions, and regional climate forecasts. Some areas may be better suited to non-forest solutions like regenerative agriculture, controlled grazing, or strategic harvesting—methods that can preserve soil carbon without amplifying fire risk.
This shift also opens the door to innovation. Environmental consultancies, satellite analytics startups, and ESG data firms are well positioned to build new services around adaptive carbon offset evaluation with a clear opportunity for companies navigating and supporting this evolving landscape.
Professor Kaveh Madani, Director of UNU-INWEH, underscores the point: forests remain essential climate tools, but only when managed dynamically and supported by real-time data. Without that, offset markets risk losing their credibility—and their climate impact.
