A reflection on invasive species, biochar, ecosystem services, and the operational realities behind high-integrity carbon markets in South Asia.
Last Saturday, I attended the Climate Party in Chennai and sat through a nearly three-hour presentation by the team from ProClime, a Singapore-headquartered climate company working across carbon projects, ecosystem restoration, and climate investments in South Asia.
The last time I heard Kavin Kumar Kandasamy from ProClime speak was during a StartupTN Climate panel in 2024. This time, while Kavin himself wasn’t present, the sessions were led by Ronnie Theresa and Anandan G, and the discussions covered everything from high-integrity carbon markets to invasive alien species threatening Indian ecosystems.
What stood out to me was this:
Most climate conversations still orbit around fossil fuels, Big Oil, and decarbonisation targets.
ProClime’s framing was slightly different.
Their argument was that while large systemic emitters remain central to the climate crisis, smaller ecological threats also quietly destabilise ecosystems at scale and solving those interconnected problems matters too.
That framing became especially visible during the discussion on invasive alien species.
Carbon Projects Beyond Just “Carbon”
ProClime currently operates across five countries with 25 projects in total, of which 11 are ongoing. Their work spans:
- hydropower projects in Nepal,
- mangrove restoration in Sri Lanka,
- reforestation and forest conservation efforts in Bangladesh,
- and emerging projects in India across Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh, and Karnataka.
They mentioned that their current emissions under management stand at 77.5 million tonnes, with a target of reaching 500 million tonnes by 2029.
The team repeatedly emphasised “high-integrity” carbon projects and discussed their proprietary philosophy built around:
- additionality,
- longevity,
- permanence,
- transparency,
- strong governance,
- sound financials,
- compelling narratives,
- and high integrity.
One interesting insight was that designing a carbon project itself can take nearly eight months before even approaching baseline studies because of the amount of ecological, financial, governance, and verification groundwork required.
They also mentioned that the voluntary carbon market globally is still relatively small compared to mandatory compliance markets, which explains why many carbon projects still struggle with scalability, policy certainty, and investor confidence.
My Questions Around Carbon Credits
I asked them something I’ve been thinking about for a while.
In a bioeconomy where agricultural waste and biomass can be converted into:
- biofuels,
- bio-oils,
- compressed biomass products,
- furniture materials,
- industrial feedstock,
- and multiple other commercial outputs,
what makes carbon credits a financially viable pathway?
Their response was interesting.
They acknowledged that carbon markets in many regions are still evolving and may become more lucrative once stronger policy tailwinds, compliance systems, and institutional mechanisms mature. But they also framed carbon projects as more than just financial instruments.
Their argument was that these projects directly support biodiversity, conservation, ecosystem restoration, and long-term ecological services which markets often fail to value adequately.
That distinction matters.
Because carbon markets are ultimately not just about tonnes of carbon.
They are about ecosystems.
I would like to insist on Ecosystem Services & Co-benefits
My work at ecoHQ involves much of ecosystem enablement, and dealing with systemic issues. So, one thing I personally felt deserved stronger emphasis during the discussion was ecosystem services and co-benefits.
Over the years, I’ve written extensively about:
- Benchmarking and Setting ESG targets – Part 1
- Greenhouse Gas (GHG) accounting, Risk Analysis, Scenario Planning as well as Reporting and Disclosures – Part 2
- Decarbonisation strategy (focusing on abatement, avoidance, offsets, insetting, and removal), climate transition strategy, and emission reduction roadmap – Part 3
- ESG Roadmap to Net Zero, Carbon market pathway to net zero (with a special focus on the Carbon Market ecosystem) – Part 4
- Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Implementation – Part 5
- Crafting a Circularity Strategy for your organisation – Part 6
I have personally been harping on social lifecycle assessment (S-LCA), inclusive transitions, and the power dynamics baked into ESG frameworks more than environmental lifecycle assessment (E-LCA) of products while carbon footprinting is done!
Last year, I attended a CII summit on ESG and a panel on strengthening ESG regulations and compliance discussed the missing link of equity, inclusion, and justice for communities at risk of being left behind while we are fixated on assessing environmental footprints alone.
I’ve also previously collaborated on a piece around Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) with Last Forest, which feels deeply relevant here. I have also visited and worked at a lot of tribal areas and remote villages since the mid and late-2000s as a Social worker and activist. Check out my experiences here.
A genuinely high-integrity carbon project cannot only optimise for carbon accounting.
It also needs to ask:
- What positive externalities does this project create?
- What unintended harms might emerge?
- Does it support biodiversity?
- Does it preserve local livelihoods?
- Are indigenous and tribal communities benefiting?
- Does it create long-term ecological resilience?
- Does it preserve cultural relationships with land and forests?
- Does it strengthen local ecosystem services?
Because permanence and additionality alone are not enough if ecosystems themselves become socially fragile or extractive in different ways.
The best climate projects are often the ones that strengthen both ecological systems and human systems together and the relationship that subsists between the two.
I had also previously discussed about Carbon Abatement, the Time Value of Carbon, and compared various solutions like Emissions Cuts and Carbon Abatement Versus Carbon Removal and Social Tipping Points based on a keynote given by Project Drawdown’s Dr. Jonathan Foley.
The Invasive Species Discussion
The second session by Anandan G focused heavily on invasive alien species and honestly, it became one of the most fascinating parts of the evening.
They discussed species like:
- Lantana camara,
- Senna spectabilis,
- and Prosopis juliflora,
which have become deeply destructive to several Indian ecosystems and wildlife habitats.
The discussion explored how these species aggressively spread, alter soil chemistry, suppress native biodiversity, damage grasslands, and even threaten tiger habitats in parts of India.
Their approach involves:
- mapping affected regions through proprietary spectral analysis,
- collaborating with government systems,
- requiring extensive manpower for ecological surveys and uprooting operations,
- and processing the resulting biomass into products like bio-oil, biochar, and charcoal.
One interesting distinction they explained was the difference between:
- native/climax species,
- naturalised species,
- and invasive alien species.
Not every foreign species automatically becomes “invasive.” Certain ecological criteria need to be met before classification.
During the discussion, I also mentioned how colonial countries and systems historically introduced several foreign species into India to support monoculture-driven extraction economies and industrial growth models. Many of those interventions continue to shape ecological consequences even today.
Building Carbon Ecosystems Requires More Than Startups
Another point that stayed with me was how strongly they positioned carbon markets as a multi-stakeholder ecosystem challenge.
Their work seems to involve collaboration across:
- governments, policy makers and bureaucratic bodies,
- enterprises,
- academia,
- financial institutions,
- technology ecosystems,
- communities, and civil society.
They also mentioned actively engaging with policy conversations, advisory ecosystems, and investment stakeholders to help carbon markets in India mature over time.
Because realistically, high-integrity carbon ecosystems cannot scale through startups alone.
They require:
- institutional trust,
- policy alignment,
- patient capital,
- scientific verification,
- community participation,
- ecological understanding,
- and governance maturity.
Final Thoughts
I don’t think carbon markets are perfect.
The industry still carries valid criticisms around greenwashing, weak verification, leakage, permanence risks, and financial speculation.
But conversations like this reminded me that there are also people trying to build more ecosystem-grounded approaches inside the space.
And perhaps one of the most important reminders from the evening was this:
Climate work is rarely just about climate.
It is about forests.
Water.
Livelihoods.
Politics.
History.
Ecology.
Communities.
Economics.
Power.
And the invisible systems connecting all of them together.
PS: You can explore my articles on Climate Systems, Climate Geopolitics and more, if curious.
Credits
This post is written by Deepa Sai for EcoHQ