Table of Contents

The Responsible Use of Offsets

There has been much criticism of carbon offsets in the past: there have been examples of greenwashing by companies and projects that violate their stated best practices. This needs to change if carbon offsets are to play a major role in bringing about decarbonization. Companies need to be educated on the responsible use of carbon offsets. Offsets should not be treated as an alternative to reducing emissions, but as a means to offset the unavoidable emissions. They should only be used temporarily, to avoid delaying transition to a low- or zero-carbon sector (UNEP, 2020). The Science-Based Targets Initiative (SBTi) released its guidance for using offsets as part of a robust corporate emission-reduction program, contributing to a growing debate over what “carbon neutrality” is and is not. There have been efforts to strengthen the carbon offsetting methodologies in recent years under ICROA. For more information on ICROA see Appendix 3. Nevertheless, there is still scope for further transparency and standardization.

Importantly, in the DeFi space, it should be known that thus far the supply side of carbon offsets has been very decentralized.

Specific Myths Addressed

Myth 1: Carbon offsets aren’t trustworthy

This is an important one, so let’s take a step back. The concept of carbon offsets has been around for a while, but it really got a boost in 2005 when the Kyoto Protocol took effect. Back then, this was still a relatively novel concept, with its fair share of teething problems, and some cowboys took advantage of poor oversight.

Today, it’s matured into a set of robust global frameworks developed by experts over the last 15 years. At its core are internationally recognized certification bodies, that make sure every ton of CO2 they certify is rigorously measured, monitored and verified.

Take the Verified Carbon Standard, and the Gold Standard. They’re widely considered the two highest standards for quality carbon offsetting in the world, and certify all of Klima’s projects. They guarantee that every ton of CO2 offset is:

Additional: Wouldn’t have happened without your supportContained: Won’t cause emissions to go up elsewherePermanent: Is protected against destruction by human or natural causesSustainable: Has a positive impact on local communities and environmentVerified: Is inspected and verified by an independent third partyUnique: Has a unique ID on a public ledger and can only be counted once

So, while you’ll always be able to find someone who sells you uncertified or questionable offsets online, going with these standards will make sure your offsets are trustworthy and effective.

Myth 2: Carbon offsets are a license to pollute.

Do people use carbon offsets as an excuse to pollute even more? That would be super lame! So is it true? Researchers from Germany looked into this and found out that it’s quite the opposite: People who offset their emissions also take more climate-positive actions in other areas of their lives.

“Offsets are an effective contribution to climate protection,” explains Prof. Andreas Ziegler. "The frequently expressed reservation that it is a matter of selling indulgences to justify additional CO2 emissions does not apply."

It’s also common sense: if you’re personally invested in a cause, you want to act to make it succeed. Offsetting and reducing go hand-in-hand.

Myth 3: Carbon offsets are a license to pollute. [Part 2]

We hear this one all the time, but our research shows something completely different: namely, that those companies that do buy offsets are doing so as part of an overall carbon-management strategy, and they’re mostly using offsets to either tackle emissions they can’t eliminate internally or to create an internal “price on carbon” that focuses attention on emissions and accelerates reductions. Among businesses tracked in EM’s 2016 buyers’ report, 88% of voluntary offset buyers and 92% of compliance buyers have formally adopted emissions reduction targets. In 2014, the 314 businesses that engage in offsetting invested more than US$42 billion in emissions reduction activities, surpassing the combined investment of the 1,522 companies who did not engage in offsetting (US$41 billion). In fact, companies that included offsetting in their carbon management strategy typically spend about 10 times more than the typical company that didn’t offset. Contrary to the “greenwashing” narrative, it appears as though using offsets is increasingly the hallmark of a company that’s leading on climate action rather than bringing up the rear.

https://www.ecosystemmarketplace.com/articles/debunked-eight-myths-carbon-offsetting/