Offset or Off Put? The carbon offset market report

Thursday, 24 May 2007 21:24

Today, the Total Environment Centre released a report into the problems and pitfalls of the Australian carbon offset market revealing a chaotic situation that threatens the credibility of companies and individuals who want to be carbon neutral.

Carbon Neutral Watch* – corporates, consultants and credibility points out the conflicting methodologies for offset approval, accreditation and monitoring processes amongst 17 companies. “These all contribute to an alarming chasm of credibility and that can become a reputational risk to the organisations who buy them,” said Jeff Angel, Director at the Total Environment Centre. “In its worst light offsets that are not robustly reviewed and assured, can be viewed as greenwash.”

“Then there are trees,” said Jeff Angel. “Carbon sequestration offsets or tree-plantings are plagued with difficulties. Accounting for the carbon varies, then there is the lack of regulation, assurance and insurance to ensure that the offset will actually deliver what it says over the entire life of the tree, regardless of weather conditions or fire.”

“To add confusion to the mix, there are currently, 4 offset accreditation schemes in operation in Australia and another 4 voluntary schemes under development overseas. It is becoming increasingly difficult to know which one is most reliable.”

However, the offset picture isn’t completely bleak. “Offsets can be a good way to change behaviour and increase resource efficiencies in organisations,” said Mr Angel. “They can create change, but it must be done in a credible fashion. Otherwise there is a real risk of claims of greenwash and an erosion of consumer confidence.”

“There is a general misunderstanding in the public domain around offsets - that it is all about trees. Which is understandable—consumers get trees. We have concluded that trees should be a last resort, if at all - whereas, carbon neutrality via energy efficiency programs and renewable energy that reduce emissions immediately are a much better option.”

“Of course we would prefer that companies reduce their impact by switching to renewable power and implementing resource efficiency programs (reducing energy, water, and other materials),” he said. “This would demonstrate a change in organisational behaviour and a real commitment, rather than tinkering around the edges with dubious offsets and continuing to emit carbon dioxide.”

The report was released in conjunction with the Green Capital seminar called Going Carbon Neutral – reality or hot air? “This issue has attracted over 700 people from corporate, government and environmental organisations to discuss it in three capital cities over the next two weeks, which demonstrates the level of concern and the need for clarity.”

* Note: The Report contains updated information on the services offered by Carbon Planet.