Carbon offsetting: should you do it?

If we’re to achieve ‘Net zero’ then one thing is increasingly clear. Carbon offsetting is an essential part of the mix. It sounds brilliant. Why not counteract the impact of those hard-to-remove emissions - by planting some trees, or finding another way to store or capture carbon?

unsplash-image-rf6ywHVkrlY.jpg

Unfortunately, life's not that simple.

In fact, carbon offsetting has become so complicated that there is now a real question as to whether it is even ethical. We’re reaching the stage where we need to question whether some carbon offsetting may do more harm than good - not just to the planet, but to your business.

Carbon offsetting: what is it?

‘Net zero’ has become the buzz phrase that’s overtaken ‘carbon neutral’.

The idea is simply that if you’re going to produce carbon emissions then you need to invest in a project that will capture or store the same quantity of CO2.

That’s most often associated with planes and planting planes: take a flight and pay for some trees to be planted. There are, however, a huge number of ways to offset carbon: investing in renewable energy, providing energy saving light bulbs or efficient stoves for countries with developing economies, or protecting existing forests.


Is offsetting a distraction that slows the pace of change?

Offsetting can be brilliant.

I recently spoke to an ethical business owner who has nailed the essence and spirit of what offsetting is meant to be. He’s audited his entire environmental footprint and cut out emissions where he can. He uses renewable energy and green hosting; he cycles (or has meetings via Zoom); even his desk is second hand.

But, he still has some emissions. Occasionally, he still needs to use his car. When he replaces his fossil fuelled car it will be with an electric one; until then he’s chosen to offset his vehicle emissions.

The truth is we’re not all that good. For someone less thoughtful or committed, offsetting can be a reason - an excuse - to carry on with unsustainable habits. That’s just human nature. It’s not always a conscious thing. It’s like justifying that last piece of cake or ‘one last glass’ because you’re going to the gym tomorrow.

It’s far better to not fly than offset the flight - but offsetting often gives us that excuse for a bit of winter sun, even if we know we really shouldn’t. It distracts us from tackling the real problem - and from adopting more effective solutions.

Do offsetting projects work?

Well, they can. But many don’t. An EU study found that in 85% of the projects they examined there was a “low likelihood that emission reductions are additional and are not over-estimated”.

In other words, the changes would have happened anyway and projects weren’t cutting emissions by nearly as much as they claimed. The list of issues goes on, but some of the most common are:

  • the planting of monocultures - which destroy ecosystems and need pesticides and irrigation to stop them dying

  • planting the wrong types of trees in the wrong place (again, affecting ecosystems and survival rates)

  • the displacement of people from their ancestral lands - extreme, but far from unheard of.

Offsetting can be good - but finding a project that’s as good as it sounds can be tricky.

Photo by Yan Kim on Unsplash

Photo by Yan Kim on Unsplash

Offsetting - the new greenwashing?

The biggest problem with offsetting is that it’s been hijacked. It started as a creative, transitional solution to a difficult problem.  But it’s evolved into something much more cynical.

If you’re well meaning and principled, you might want to use offsetting to minimise the impact of making an essential trip; or of the electricity that you use in a rented space.

In a time when we need ‘urgent and unprecedented change’ offsetting has become the smokescreen that facilitates ‘business as usual’.

  • If you want to extract oil from the North Sea? Offset it.

  • If you want to expand your airport - and encourage your passengers to continue flying, guilt free? Offset it.

  • If you want to continue using concrete and steel (two of the most problematic industries when it comes to emissions) to construct yet more buildings in lieu of existing ecosystems? You know what to do.

But should the actions of cynical big businesses really matter if you’re confident that your project is ethical and you’re offsetting for the right reasons?

Is offsetting a looming PR disaster?

The problem with greenwashing is that, eventually, it washes away. And the first people to see beyond the rhetoric are conscious consumers - the very people who are attracted to ethical businesses.

It seems unlikely that the trend - of big business doing little whilst claiming great strides - can or will continue unchecked. People - ordinary people - care about climate change. And when the extent and effects of this greenwashing become clear, they’re going to be angry.

There’s going to be a backlash - and it’s entirely possible that we will all tarred with the same brush.

Consumers see headlines, not nuance. As offsetting gains an increasingly dirty reputation, the danger is that all those who adopt it will be seen as part of the problem, rather than the solution.

That, of course, is not in itself a reason to stop offsetting.

But it is a reason to think carefully about how, and why, you offset; and how you communicate that to your customers and clients.

  • “Ten things your customer wants to see on your About page” is an in depth guide on talking to customers about issues like this. You can download it here (email required).

Previous
Previous

The language of a crisis

Next
Next

The Tony’s Chocolonely story: a load of baloney?