When green slowly turns dark green
- Editorial Team SDG17
- 3 hours ago
- 4 min read
There is a moment, almost imperceptible, when a good intention begins to lose its shape. It does not happen suddenly, nor always through bad faith. Sometimes it occurs when a noble idea, protecting the climate, is translated into a system too simple for a problem that is anything but simple. Green, then, ceases to be a clear promise and takes on a darker, more ambiguous tone.
The recent DW documentary that serves as the starting point for this reflection does not accuse or condemn. It does something more unsettling, it observes. It observes how certain actions presented as climate protection operate, in practice, like familiar industrial mechanisms, with very real consequences for territories and for people. This is not about questioning the urgency of the climate crisis, but about asking whether all the solutions presented under its banner are truly coherent with what they claim to defend.
The story unfolds in the Brazilian state of Minas Gerais, a region where vast areas of the Cerrado, an ancient savannah rich in biodiversity, are being converted into industrial eucalyptus plantations. These plantations are promoted as part of carbon offset strategies, fast growing trees that capture carbon dioxide and help companies and countries move towards the much repeated goal of climate neutrality.
On paper, the idea sounds reasonable. The documentary, however, encourages us to look at the full cycle. The eucalyptus planted for climate purposes does not remain standing as restored forest. It is cut down, transformed into charcoal and then burned in the steel industry. The carbon captured during the tree’s growth is released back into the atmosphere, while the process becomes part of an industrial chain producing iron and steel, some of it destined for European markets under the label of green steel.
Here, the first uncomfortable question arises, quietly but clearly, to what extent can a model be considered climate friendly when it plants trees only to burn them shortly afterwards. This is not an ideological question, but an accounting one. It concerns real carbon balances, storage times, direct and indirect emissions, and the difference between reducing emissions and merely shifting them elsewhere.
The second layer of the story is even more sensitive. The plantations expand into territories where traditional communities have lived for generations. People who may not appear as landowners in official records, but who depend on that land for their survival, small scale farming, gathering, access to water. The documentary shows land conflicts, fences erected on communal land, the presence of private security companies, and a climate of tension that, in some cases, has escalated into violence.
There is no need for exaggeration or dramatics. It is enough to acknowledge that, for those who live there, reforestation does not arrive as a global climate solution, but as an immediate threat, wells running dry, streams disappearing, loss of autonomy and fear for the future. Green, when seen from the ground, does not always match the green of corporate reports.
One of the most compelling aspects of the documentary is its scientific dimension. Researchers compare natural Cerrado vegetation with eucalyptus plantations and reach a conclusion that challenges a widely held assumption, much of the Cerrado’s carbon is not stored in visible trees, but underground, in deep root systems. In a sense, it is an inverted forest. Destroying it to plant monocultures does not only reduce biodiversity, it may actually diminish, rather than increase, real carbon storage capacity.
This point connects to a broader debate that rarely reaches headlines, not all ecosystems function like forests, and not all forests function in the same way. Turning savannahs, grasslands or wetlands into tree plantations can be, from both a climate and ecological perspective, a serious mistake, even if the result looks green.
The situation becomes even more complex when certifications and carbon markets enter the picture. International labels promise to guarantee good environmental practice and respect for human rights. Yet the documentary reveals a worrying gap between some certification reports and the lived experience of local communities, particularly regarding access to water. It does not claim that certification systems are useless, but it does suggest that they can be insufficient when faced with unequal power relations and strong economic interests.
Institutional responsibility is not avoided either. The World Bank appears as a historical driver of such models, originally conceived to help developing countries finance a transition towards more sustainable economies. That initial intention may well have been sincere. The outcome, however, raises doubts, projects that generate local conflict while allowing global industries to present themselves as decarbonised.
All this leads to a wider reflection that goes beyond Brazil or eucalyptus plantations. In Europe, climate neutrality has become an almost unquestionable objective. Yet the path towards it matters as much as the destination. If the transition is built by externalising social and ecological costs, if it relies on quick fixes that leave production and consumption models largely unchanged, there is a risk of replacing one problem with another.
Speaking of dark green is not an act of provocation, but an invitation to nuance. To accept that there are grey areas in climate action, and that pointing them out does not weaken the fight against climate change, but strengthens it. The credibility of any transition depends on its internal coherence and its external fairness.
Perhaps the most valuable lesson from this case is an old one, almost traditional, before celebrating a solution, it is worth asking where it comes from, how it works, and who pays the price. The climate crisis demands urgent responses, yes, but it also demands honesty. Because when green becomes too dark, it no longer illuminates the path forward, it begins to obscure it.
Youtube credits: https://www.youtube.com/@DWDocumentary