Video

Carbon credits: the “solution” that doesn’t change anything

Carbon credits have become one of the main responses to the climate crisis. They show up in corporate strategies, public policies, and net-zero pledges, built on a simple idea: those who emit carbon can offset it by buying reductions somewhere else.

The problem starts when offsetting replaces real reductions, and in many cases emissions keep happening anyway. What actually changes is how those emissions are accounted for.

In practice, one ton of CO₂ emitted by an industry is treated as equivalent to one ton that is “avoided” or “removed” somewhere else, often through forest-based projects. This equivalence ignores important differences between types of carbon, time horizons, and the real risk of reversal.

The result is a system that allows production processes to remain unchanged, while the climate “solution” is confined to documents, certificates, and future targets. The atmosphere keeps receiving carbon, but the books balance on paper.

In Brazil, this debate is even more sensitive: forests, land, and territories are brought into this logic as offset assets, while highly polluting sectors gain more time to postpone structural changes.

Want to dive deeper?

Watch the full video on this topic and dive into a detailed analysis with data, examples, and real-world cases!

Disclaimer: The video is in Brazilian Portuguese, but simultaneous translation and subtitles are available in multiple languages.

UGREEN

Apply sustainability to your projects, products, and business!

A lot of people talk about sustainability, but few know how to actually use it to make decisions about projects, products, or a business.

With UGREEN Pass, you learn how to connect environmental impact with cost, feasibility, and technical decision-making. You learn how to read data, understand real-world limits, choose strategies, and avoid mistakes.

Want to understand and apply sustainability with confidence? Click the link and learn more about UGREEN Pass!

News

2026 Winter Olympics accelerate the sustainability agenda in Milan and Cortina

The 2026 Winter Olympics in Milan and Corina d’Ampezzo are being used as a tool for urban transformation. Unlike previous editions of the Games, the focus is not on new monumental or temporary structures, but on reusing existing areas and creating infrastructure for long-term use.

In Milan, the former Porta Romana rail yard was converted into the Olympic Village, and after the Games the complex will become Italy’s largest student housing development, with 1,700 beds, some of them offered at below-market rents. The project was designed from the start for post-Olympic use, avoiding temporary structures and material waste.

Another example is the Santa Giulia Arena, built for the hockey competitions, which is part of a broader urban regeneration plan. Located next to a major public transport hub, the arena was designed as a permanent venue for sports and cultural events, reducing the risk of underuse after the Games.

• On the environmental front, 92% of the sports venues already existed or are temporary.

The new buildings operate on renewable energy, use water-efficiency systems, and follow waste recycling targets. Mobility was designed to prioritize public transport (metro and trains), with the M4 line connecting the airport to the city center with extended service hours during the event.

The green legacy of the Italian cities is reinforced by the Forestami project, which plans to plant 3 million trees by 2030 to fight urban heat islands and air pollution. Part of this target was brought forward to meet the demands of the Games.

Beyond the urban gains, the model adopted by Milan-Cortina 2026 also relies on territorial decentralization, with competitions spread across Alpine towns such as Bormio, Livigno, and Val Di Fiemme, which use existing hotels and facilities to host athletes. This strategy avoids new permanent construction in sensitive areas and channels investment toward regions facing depopulation and dependent on winter tourism.

In terms of mobility, the legacy goes beyond the Olympic period. Expanding public transport, increasing night-time metro and bus services, and accelerating cycling infrastructure projects are all part of the climate targets already set out in the city’s urban planning. The goal is to structurally reduce car use, rather than simply meet the event’s temporary demand.

Despite the advances mentioned, the process has faced criticism. Projects such as the Santa Giulia Arena have led to the loss of areas of spontaneous vegetation, as well as rising property values in regenerated zones, raising concerns about gentrification. The challenge for the post-2026 period will be to ensure that environmental and urban benefits do not deepen social inequalities, consolidating a legacy that is sustainable from both an economic and a social perspective.