Are carbon offsets worth it?
Have you ever paid to offset the carbon emissions from your flight or invested in a carbon offset scheme? Are carbon offset credits worth buying to fight climate change, or are there better methods?
Carbon offsets have become a popular tool in global efforts to mitigate climate change.
Offsetting is a way of paying for others to reduce emissions or absorb CO2 to compensate for your own emissions. For example, by planting trees to suck carbon out of the atmosphere as they grow, or by delivering energy-efficient cooking stoves to communities in developing countries, or by opting to pay extra on your next flight to help the planet. But is it a waste of money?
Let us know your experiences and ideas. We’d love to hear from you!
Read more about this issue in these articles:
From the article Offset scandals put Switzerland in the spotlight at COP28
From the article Swiss carbon offset giant pulls plug on Zimbabwe project amid allegations
From the article CEO of Swiss carbon offset firm South Pole resigns
Compensations are simply cool
Kompensationen sind einfach cool
Unfortunately I am too stupid to understand your question.
Ich bin leider zu dumm um Ihre Frage zu verstehen.
Paid? Who collects this money? How is this going to help the climate?
No, I do not believe in this at all.
I have never paid for such compensation. I have yet to find a meaningful project that incorporates CO2 offsetting in a sustainable way.
I would be very happy to hear about really sustainable projects.
With sustainable greetings
Urs Anton Löpfe
Ich habe noch nie solche Kompensation bezahlt. Ich habe bis heute noch kein sinnvolles Projekt gefunden, in das CO2 Kompensationen nachhaltig eingeflossen sind.
Ich würde mich sehr freuen von wirklich nachahltigen Projekte zu hören.
Mit nachhaltigen Grüssen
Urs Anton Löpfe
Monetizing the carbon footprint will only achieve that the balance will be paid by the countries with less resources and that pollute less. This joke will leave as always the powerful states clean and the poor ones in debt up to the carbon footprint. hahahaha what a crazy crazy world.
Monetizar la huella de carbono solo lograra que el el equilibrio lo paguen los países con menores recursos y que menos contaminan. Esta broma dejara como siempre a los estados poderosos limpios y a los pobres encima endeudados hasta de huella de carbono. jajajaja que mundo loco loco
In the district of Mainz-Bingen, we are implementing a regional, secure, affordable and climate-neutral energy supply, an energy cell.
To date, we have not found any CO2 compensation that invests in projects that really reduce or compensate for CO2 emissions in the long term.
If anyone has any other experience, please contact urs.loepfe@noblackout.eu.
Im Landkreis Mainz-Bingen setzen wir eine regionale, sichere, bezahlbare und klimaneutrale Energieversorgung, eine Energiezelle um.
Wir haben bis heute keine CO2 Kompensation gefunden, die in Projekte investiert die nachhaltig den CO2 Ausstoss wirklich reduziert oder kompensiert.
Sollte jemand andere Erfahrung gemacht haben, bitte bei urs.loepfe@noblackout.eu melden.
Thank you for the clarification. But what should I do now? Sure, only fly when I really have to. And if I then want to offset my emissions, what do I do? Just nothing? That's grist to the mill of those who deny measures to combat climate change. So what are projects that really compensate? That would be interesting.
Please also suggest solutions in the sense of Solution Journalism / Postitive Journalism.
Danke für die Aufklärung. Doch was soll ich nun tun? Klar, nur noch fliegen, wenn ich es wirklich muss. Und wenn ich dann meine Emission kompensieren möchte, was tue ich dann? Einfach nichts? Das ist Wasser auf die Mühlen deren, welche Massnahmen gegen den Klimawandel negieren. Was sind dann Projekte, die wirklich kompensieren? Das wäre interessant.
Bitte jeweils auch Lösungen vorschlagen im Sinne von Solution Journalism / Postitive Journalism.
The fact that Switzerland could develop a tree reforestation plan to absorb Co2 from the atmosphere would be a way to help mitigate the harmful effect of Co2. It is true that in the past, the Amazon was colloquially called the lungs of the world, due to its large forest mass, although this does not mean that other areas of the planet should be underestimated. For it is possible to develop a forest mass in a state like the Swiss Confederation, it must take into account preventive measures for forest fires. César De Lucas Ivorra, San Juan De Alicante, Spain.
El hecho que Suiza pudiera desarrollar un plan de reforestación de árboles, para absorber el Co2 de la atmósfera, sería una forma de ayudar a mitigar el efecto nocivo del Co2. Es cierto, que en tiempos pasados, la Amazonía, se le llamaba coloquialmente el pulmón del mundo, debido a su gran masa forestal, aunque no por ello hay que minusvalorar otras zonas del planeta. Para ello es posible masa forestal en el hecho de desarrollarse en un estado como la Confederación Helvética, debe tener en cuenta medidas preventivas por incendios forestales. César De Lucas Ivorra, San Juan De Alicante, España.
climate compensation business can achieve nothing. We are cheating ourselves.
Only domestic measures are of any use. This also applies to other countries around the world.
Klima-Kompensations-Geschäft können nichts erreichen. Wir betrügen uns selbst damit.
Nur Massnahmen im Inland nützen etwas. Das gilt auch für andere Länder der Welt.
Whilst it is clear that emissions reduction is fundamental to mitigating climate change, the debate of reduction vs offsets seems to blind people to a fundamental truth - which is that having more forest and functional ecosystems is better than having less, for which there needs to be a mechanism to provide sustainable funding and incentive to preserve and enhance nature across the globe and especially in developing countries.
As a young stage at a Swiss law firm in Geneva, we were paid by a client to do a thorough research of the carbon credits market and we conferred with auditors and lawyers at the world economic forum and our conclusion was that it needs a very serious rewrite and restructuring along with the force of law, as well as the ability to audit transparently with scientific evidence-based data and legal enforcement. People who are found to be abusing, manipulating or fraudulently participating in any future market should face serious criminal time, include piercing the corporate veil. We must move into a period of ethical capitalism because capitalism is clearly the most efficient way to both develop, innovate, distribute, and deploy any new technologies. Those same technologies which can save our planet. I believe we've far pasted any tipping point. We need to dig in and really pay attention to the climate. But, it should also be a massive job creator, an economic driver. It's a massive global undertaking which will require scientific research at universities, actual implementation of these findings, manufacturing, cooperation amongst the parties who can get behind it for various reasons both economic and environmental so both economic conservatives and green party environmentalist can meet together on this issue because it can and has the ability to be both an economic driver and an actual force for change and maybe just maybe we can turn it around. The bee processes and new technologies will require in the real world in huge manufacturing, tera forming, lifestyle changes that don't have such a hard impact on people that they feel like they're being forced to abandon some sort of comfort which I believe is attainable. It can be both sales, manufacturing, distribution, jobs, and conservation along with sustainability. But, it requires absolute transparency and real data not manipulated falsified or or massage statistics but solid progress and it's through our minds and knowledge the gift of fire back Prometheus and that we will be able maybe to save our environment. At the moment this is the only spaceship we have and even if we do any kind of multi-plantet species type of living it will require a feed stock of both materials, resources and things like seeds and resources we haven't yet even considered.. I think the time for argument and debate is over and it's absolutely clear to everybody who's not just arguing to argue or backing their team to back their team whatever the case may be we are facing a climatic existential risk of severe extinction level proportions.
We need to restore the ecosystems and reduce our co2 output. Is this so difficult to understand?
And where does this money come from to restore ecosystems?
- Not from governments
- Not from corporations
- Not from rich individuals
- Not from toy NGOs who serve as money laundering fro the rich and wealthy.
- And definitely not from greenwashed eco-freaks who attend Cop28.
So it has to com from Offsets. This one is a no brainer.
Secondly, why looking at everything so black and white? We need to do both.
Government regulating the carbon market? This is a joke, right?
- Government should be there to faze out fossil fuels. How many have done so?
- Government hare there to implement carbon taxes? How many have done this?
- Governments are there to invest into renewables. I think only "ohh mighty and bad China" has done so sufficiantly. All others have failed.
- Governments are there to invest into public transport. Well again, some have done quite a good job, others are lagging behind.
- And last but not least, governments should decide on how much offset is permissible and how much of the total co2 reduction should be real reductions, by reducing co2 output.
That's what I also asked Carsten Warnecke of the NewClimate Institute in Germany. He has been studying carbon markets for 15 years and does not have a good opinion of voluntary emissions offsets. Find the interview [url=https://www.swissinfo.ch/ita/-mi-auguro-che-il-mercato-volontario-dei-crediti-di-carbonio-finisca-presto-/49020816]here[/url].
È quello che ho chiesto anche a Carsten Warnecke del NewClimate Institute, in Germania. Studia i mercati del carbonio da 15 anni è non ha una bella opinione delle compensazioni volontarie delle emissioni. Trovate l'intervista [url=https://www.swissinfo.ch/ita/-mi-auguro-che-il-mercato-volontario-dei-crediti-di-carbonio-finisca-presto-/49020816]qui[/url].
Here is the English version of Luigi's interesting interview with Carsten Warnecke about carbon offsets. https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/-i-hope-the-voluntary-carbon-offset-market-will-come-to-an-end-/49035100
All respect for their commitment. When I asked the question, I was thinking more of people like oligarch King Charles and his Windsors, all the Brussels aparatchiks, the climate stickers and every single one of the 70,000 visitors to COP 28.
I hear all these clever suggestions. But why haven't any of these super-smart speakers (d,m,w) stood up and explained what they have done in the last 10 years to reduce their personal carbon footprint? They could start an annual competition among themselves where they announce their personal restrictions. If we want to make a change, everyone has to start with themselves and not just talk big.
Ich höre alle diese klugen Vorschläge. Nur, warum ist noch keiner dieser superschlauen Redner (d,m,w) hingestanden und hat erklärt, was er in den letzten 10 Jahren getan hat, um seinen persönlichen CO2-Fussabdruck zu reduzieren? Sie könnten untereinander einen jährlichen Wettbewerb starten, wo sie ihre persönlichen Einschränkungen bekannt geben. Wenn wir etwas verändern wollen, muss jeder bei sich persönlich anfangen und nicht nur grosse Töne spucken.
Spent twenty years in the courts fighting local and state planning authorities over urban design, which is a prerequisite for passive solar design, which can save huge amounts of energy in heating and cooling, but 2000 ad so I predate even greta, that's what I have done?
I have NEVER paid anything to offset Co2, and I will NEVER pay anything for this global scam, which took no account of the progress made by the car, airline and other industries in terms of emissions! We're told that Co2 is dangerous for the planet, while greedy criminals are cutting down thousands of hectares of forest to grow soya and palm oil (10 times more dangerous than Co2), while Germany is reopening coal-fired power stations at every turn,
France is scrapping its nuclear production, which emits no Co2 during production, while they have a waste treatment and recycling system, all to satisfy eco-freaks who are totally out of touch with reality! What's more, I haven't taken a plane since 2009, because I'm totally opposed to the tourist industry, I've NEVER been on one of those abominable "liners" with their tacky kitsch and slave crews, I avoid public transport as much as possible, I'm in favor of the individual car and carpooling... (as an anecdote: since I stopped using public transport, I haven't had a single flu since the last century, whereas before I used to catch 3 a winter - even covid 19 didn't get me, even though I'm NI vaccinated NI tested).
Je n'ai JAMAIS payé quoi que ce soit pour compenser le Co2 et je ne payerai JAMAIS quoi que ce soit pour cette arnaque mondiale qui ne tint pas compte des progrès de l'industrie automobile, aérienne et autres en terme d'émissions! On nous dit que le Co2 est dangereux pour la planète, alors que des criminels cupides a souhait suppriment des milliers d'hectares de forêt pour cultiver du soja et de l'huile de palme (10 fois plus dangereux que le Co2), que l'Allemagne ré ouvre des centrales a charbon a tour de bras,
Que la France met a terre sa production nucléaire qui n'émet aucun Co2 en production, alors qu'ils ont une filière de traitement et de recyclage des déchets, tout ça pour satisfaire des bobos écolos totalement déconnectés de la réalité! De plus je n'ai plus pris l'avion depuis 2009, car je suis totalement opposé a l'industrie du tourisme, je ne suis JAMAIS monté dans ces abominables "paquebots" tas de ferrailles au kitsch de mauvais goût et aux équipage esclaves, j'évite le plus possible les transports publics, je suis partisan de la voiture individuelle et du covoiturage... (pour anecdote: Depuis que j'ai cessé d'utiliser les transports publics, je n'ai plus eu aucune grippe depuis le siècle passé, alors qu'avant je m'en choppai 3 par hivers même le covid 19 n'a pas réussi a me toucher, alors que je suis NI vacciné NI testé)
The congressional hearings in 1985 into the greenhouse effect or climate change, fast forward to today and really not much has changed, we have arrived at peak food but climate changed has arrived faster than expected, as Antonio Guteres said no surprise, the only surprise is the speed at which it arrived. Climate scientist's seem to be forming the opinion that next year could be the heartbreak, so if we tip 120 million off the planet through starvation, double the ww2 death count are we at least going to make accountable a number say of half those that paid the highest price for war crimes, given we are a kinder more compassionate humanity than we were then and who will the accountable be?
Thank you for your comment. What do you think: are carbon offsets a step in the right direction? Why or why not?"
No offsets are a manipulative tool, and humans just love to tweak stuff to make it look better than it is, the swiss probably the most noticeable exception to the rule, without being to harsh passive solar design can probably deliver 80% of the emissions cuts we need, I believe we unlocked the intellectual property in 1908, in 1985 the congressional hearings where told now is the time to act, its a three minute piece of work to mandate passive solar design into planning law but the political masters in australia still can't find a spare 3 minutes after 120 years, like the idiot catholics they sit on their hands when they should act and act when they should sit on their hands, now it's to late to be proactive, and that which should have been a easy road is now fraught with heartbreak and pain, they are failures of the highest order as people and there is no valid excuse...
I think that carbon offsets are difficult to incentivize emission reductions because companies that purchase credits can secure profits by increasing the price of their products and services. Instead, a system that imposes a large carbon tax and at the same time returns a large portion of the carbon tax to citizens would be more likely to encourage companies and citizens to change their behavior toward decarbonization and at the same time reduce the disruption to household finances that would accompany the transition to a decarbonized society.
カーボンオフセットは、クレジット購入企業が自社製品やサービスを価格アップさせることで利益確保できるので、排出削減のインセンティブが働き難いと思います。それよりも、大幅な炭素税をかけると同時に炭素税の大部分を市民に還元する仕組みの方が、企業及び市民に脱炭素への行動変容を促すと同時に、脱炭素社会への移行に伴う家計収支の混乱を抑え易いと思います。
Compensation eases the conscience, but it is not a good solution at all! In fact, it is rather hypocritical to pay in order to pollute, even if you would then have to repair it elsewhere: but what guarantee will there ever be?
La compensazione mette a posto la coscienza, ma non è affatto una buona soluzione! Anzi è piuttosto ipocrita pagare per poter inquinare, anche se poi si dovrebbe riparare altrove: ma che garanzia ci sarà mai?
And this is exactly what it is: a scheme.
And hypocritical as well!
e pure ipocrita!
Join the conversation!