Our site saves cookies on your device in order to better personalize content and track traffic. You can disable the usage of cookies by changing the settings of your browser. By browsing our website without changing the browser settings you grant us permission to store that information on your device. Learn more.
Feb. 28, 2023
In the EU and the US, carbon offset markets are under increased scrutiny. Lack of international regulation and objective auditing can lead to negative side-effects in the Global South. Drastically lowering our emissions and establishing world-wide binding agreements are the path to a brighter and more just future for all.
By the end of 2022, the European Commission will present its proposal to unify the measurement, reporting and verification process (MRV) of EU’s carbon removals. This proposal will exclusively encompass projects on EU soil. It won’t offer any framework on how organisations operating in the EU should deal with carbon offset projects nor on how they should communicate about their carbon strategy.
Carbon Offset Markets have jumped from $520.000.000 in 2020 to $2.000.000.000 in 2021 and are coming under increased scrutiny in the US. A few months after John Oliver destroyed the current state of Carbon Offsets in his weekly satirical review, US senators pushed for regulator crackdown. The senators said that offsets that did not genuinely deliver the environmental benefits they promised constituted “fraudulent investments”. These investments were “a convenient and profitable way to market climate consciousness without requiring real action to reduce emissions.”
All over the world, litigation linked to greenwashing and carbon offsets is becoming an increased risk to large corporations. One reason is linked to the unregulated carbon credit market that is widely regarded as a ‘wild west’. This is especially true given that independent and objective audits of carbon offset projects are still far from being the standard.
Scientists and watchdogs agree that high quality Carbon Offsets should at the very least be:
The last item raises some important ethical questions regarding offsetting through ‘planting trees’. Massive tracts of land in the Global South are owned by people and organisations that acquired these through colonial proceedings. This land can now bring additional wealth to the 'already rich', enlarging the gap between the wealthy and the poor.
Even in secluded areas around the world, indigenous communities whose livelihoods do not depend on monetary riches are targeted. Carbon Offsetting companies do not hesitate to contact these communities with a promise of incomprehensible amounts of money which has the potential to fully disrupt their social fabric. A good example of the consequences of eco-colonialism for the sake of Global North’s markets.
The adage goes that every crisis can be an opportunity, even the largest crisis that humanity has ever faced. And thus it should be marketed and monetised. The Climate Crisis is in part caused by unchecked markets that for too long have put Profit over People or Planet. This raises the following questions: Should it be these same markets that get to decide on the future of our species (and so many others)? Or should we individuals, as parts of structures and organisations get to decide on a brighter future for all?
We at Tapio believe in the second path. And we know what must be done.
Starting today, we need to:
And we can help you.
Together, let’s become #ClimateDriven.