Key Points

With the boom in renewable energy, many of the credits that trade hands merely represent a transfer of money from one profitable enterprise to another, critics say

Key Excerpts

‘Now that renewable energy can stand on its own financially, some investors, researchers and government regulators say companies buying … [some] credits are just transferring cash to other established companies. They say the old U.N. program… is draining money from newer initiatives that need it more, such as experiments in capturing carbon directly from the air.’

‘Pedro Martins Barata, a former executive board member of the U.N. program, known as the Clean Development Mechanism, or CDM, says he is concerned the market lacks transparency, making it difficult for buyers to understand which projects would have happened without issuing credits. “No one should buy any of that stuff anymore,” said Mr. Martins, who is now a senior director at the Environmental Defense Fund, a nonprofit advocacy group.’

‘Surging demand for credits is being driven by companies, often under pressure from investors, governments and customers, to reduce their net carbon footprint.’

‘…according to environmental finance data provider Ecosystem Marketplace, … estimates of the [voluntary carbon] market’s size over the next decade range from $50 billion to $180 billion annually, according to the carbon-credit industry trade group Taskforce on Scaling the Voluntary Carbon Markets.’

This article was originally published on The Wall Street Journal

Key Points

EasyJet is to stop offsetting carbon emissions by its planes as it unveiled a “roadmap to net zero” emissions by 2050 including introducing hydrogen-powered jet engines.

Other elements of easyJet’s new strategy include using sustainable aviation fuel, more fuel-efficient planes and carbon capture to reach the target.

EasyJet insisted it was the most ambitious plan yet from an airline to tackle emissions, while it continued to partner with firms on exploring new technologies.

Key Excerpts

‘Last year, a joint investigation by the Guardian revealed that major airlines including easyJet were using unreliable “phantom” carbon credits to claim their flights were carbon neutral.’

‘EasyJet plans to curb CO₂ emissions by 35% per passenger kilometre by 2035 as part of its new roadmap, and said the steps it was taking had been validated by the Science-Based Targets initiative.’

‘The airline believes it can cut its own emissions by 78% by 2050, with carbon capture technology allowing it to reach net zero.’

‘“We’ve said all along that we want to transition to technologies that reduce our carbon intensity from our direct operation, that’s our key goal.”’

‘The Guardian investigation with Unearthed, Greenpeace’s investigative arm, found that the carbon credits were based on complicated and unreliable hypothetical calculations of avoided deforestation, which experts warned were not real emission reductions. The findings were fiercely criticised by Verra, the carbon offsetting standard that approved the credits.’

This article was originally published on The Guardian

Key Points

The global voluntary carbon market, which allows companies to invest in environmental projects around the world to offset their own carbon footprint, could undermine global warming without an overhaul, a UCL and Trove Research study has found. 

Key Excerpts

‘with 600 to 700 million tonnes of old carbon credits available, many of which are no longer considered valid in terms of offsetting, real carbon reductions are under threat.’

‘a new governing body is needed to … set strict rules on what counts as a carbon credit.’

‘Report authors support the commitments made by companies and individuals to reduce their carbon footprints, but say reform is needed with a mixture of regulation, improved standards and stimulating consumer-led demand to ensure only high-quality credits are purchased. ‘

‘VERRA, Gold Standard, American Carbon Registry, Climate Action Reserve and Plan Vivo … should … consider cleaning their registries of low-quality legacy projects’

‘A consumer-led approach could help limit the use of older, poor quality credits, with groups of carbon offset buyers agreeing to the highest standards of environmental integrity.’

‘A buyer-led initiative could also be very effective in driving … the use of high-quality carbon offsets’

This article was originally published on UCL News

Key Points

The voluntary carbon market is rife with low-quality carbon projects that are not delivering on promised climate benefits, or that have serious negative consequences for biodiversity and human rights.

Individuals and businesses, including many multinationals, are using carbon credits issued by these projects to offset their emissions. But offsetting through these kinds of credits, which flood the current market, may result in little or adverse results for the climate.

Key Excerpts

‘As detailed in a recent white paper by Compensate, 90 per cent of carbon offsetting projects using nature-based solutions – the majority of which are certified by international standards Verra or Gold Standard – fail to meet our proprietary sustainability criteria.’

‘It’s clear that there is a need to raise the bar in order for offsetting efforts to achieve actual climate impact while providing positive benefits for local communities and biodiversity.’

‘While emissions reductions should be the primary tool in this fight… [to meet the targets set by the Paris Agreement]…, carbon capture will need to play a part in removing the already excess CO2 in the atmosphere. But currently, customers of the voluntary carbon market are, in many cases, being sold empty promises.’

‘many projects… [are]… inflating baseline emissions in order to generate more carbon credits for the project, thus taking credit for what the project did not do.’

‘For carbon credits to be real, the sale of the credits needs to generate or incentivise an additional climate benefit’

This article was originally published on EuroNews

Key Points

Many companies are relying heavily on carbon offsets to reduce their CO2 emissions profile.

But existing offsets can be of poor quality and outdated, making it difficult to measure the benefits they offer.

Efforts are underway to improve the quality of carbon offsets so companies that buy them can make a meaningful contribution to fighting climate change.

Key Excerpts

‘…because many of the carbon offsets on offer today are outdated, of poor quality or hard to verify, they risk boosting global emissions instead of curtailing them.’

‘…many companies keen to hit their net zero goals may end up buying outdated offsets (also known as carbon credits) from projects that don’t provide “additionality.” If there is no additionality, that basically means that purchasing offsets does not reduce emissions beyond business-as-usual.’

‘“Really good firms will think carefully about which offsets they choose,” said Maslin (University College London). “There is a reputational risk” from buying outdated credits.’

‘The presence of legacy offsets “makes it a lot harder” to fight climate change, said Max Scher, head of clean energy and carbon programs at the cloud computing company (SalesForce). “We’ve generally steered away from large-scale renewable energy projects that are most suspect about this.” Scher added that Salesforce uses “a lot of additional screens to help weed out lower-tier carbon credits.”’

‘Carbon offsets “can be a powerful tool if they’re done right,” said Alex Hanafi, the Environmental Defense Fund’s Director of Multilateral Climate Strategy, who is working on the guidance project. “If they’re not done right, they can actually be detrimental to climate action.”’

This article was originally published on S&P Global