Global Charities Say Using Companies’ Carbon Offsets to Lower Emissions Undermines Climate Targets
Greenpeace, Amnesty International and Oxfam are among over 80 charities arguing that using carbon offsets delays climate action
Greenpeace, Amnesty International and Oxfam are among over 80 charities arguing that using carbon offsets delays climate action
More than 80 global charities and climate industry bodies are voicing their opposition to the use of carbon offsets by companies and countries to lower their carbon emissions, saying that implementing those projects only delays climate action.
Charities including Oxfam, Greenpeace and Amnesty International as well as industry bodies and pressure groups like the European Federation for Transport and Environment and NewClimate Institute signed a letter on Tuesday urging companies to stick to scientifically backed methods to lower carbon emissions and in particular for the Science Based Targets Initiative and the Greenhouse Gas Protocol to continue to exclude carbon offsets from their methodologies on how companies can lower emissions.
“Climate targets must focus primarily on reduction of greenhouse gas emissions within companies’ and countries’ own boundaries, including the phasing out of fossil fuel production, transport, sale and use,” the letter said.
“An urgent scale-up of financial support from both public and private actors is needed for this. But allowing companies and countries to meet climate commitments with carbon credits is likely to slow down global emission reductions while failing to provide anything like the scale of funds needed in the Global South, and reducing pressure to develop large-scale mechanisms such as ‘polluter pays’ fees on emission-intensive sectors,” it added.
Scrutiny of carbon offsets has grown in recent months after the SBTi, a nonprofit organisation that helps companies set targets for lowering emissions, said in April it was considering allowing carbon offsets to be part of the tool kit companies could use to reduce their impacts on the environment. That decision had been in opposition to its longstanding policy of excluding offsets, resulting in backlash from within the organisation itself as well as partner companies like Hennes & Mauritz , better known as H&M.
However, companies in industries from technology to mining argue that offsets are key to reducing private-sector emissions and moving to net zero. Microsoft for example has spent hundreds of millions on carbon offset projects, arguing that without doing so the company wouldn’t be able to move to net zero, especially over its indirect emissions.
“It is about creating a market for high-quality high-integrity durable carbon-removal assets,” said Melanie Nakagawa, Microsoft’s chief sustainability officer in a recent interview . “Think about sequestering carbon into the soils using enhanced rock weathering or rocks that are absorbing carbon that is being turned into concrete. Or Mombak, which is a large forestry project in Brazil. These are the ways that we think about applying it.”
In May, the U.S. government also gave its backing for the voluntary carbon market , saying that “high-integrity” voluntary carbon markets can play a role in reaching net-zero emissions globally.
The letter added that offsetting “at best, doesn’t reduce the concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere, it simply moves emission reductions from one place to another.” The charities also argued that allowing offsets to grow means that high-emitting activities are able to carry on.
To add to this, the charities and industry bodies said that there are only so many high-quality projects that can be used to reduce emissions, meaning that demand is likely to outstrip supply. They also questioned offsets’ effectiveness, saying that their use could just lead to deforestation in other areas or lead to social and environmental harm.
“The science clearly shows that offsets fail to deliver additional emissions reductions and are an unreliable tool for fighting the climate crisis,” the groups added.
A spokesperson for SBTi said that the organisation is still in the research phase of its policy revision. “The Corporate Net-Zero Standard hasn’t been changed, and it cannot and will not change until the Standard Operating Procedure for the revision of the Corporate Net-Zero Standard has been completed,” the spokesperson said.
Microsoft didn’t respond to a request for comment.
BNW Developments has established a Sydney presence, joining Arada and Sobha Realty among the growing number of UAE developers pursuing Australian buyers and development opportunities.
Australian shares fell on Thursday as Wall Street weakness, rising oil and persistent rate concerns weighed on most of the market. The S&P/ASX 200 declined 0.72 per cent to 8,702. The All Ordinaries lost 0.66 per cent to finish at 8,897. Mining stocks were hit particularly hard, while real estate also dragged on the index. …
Continue reading “ASX falls 0.7 per cent as miners and property stocks retreat”
Australian shares fell on Thursday as Wall Street weakness, rising oil and persistent rate concerns weighed on most of the market.
The S&P/ASX 200 declined 0.72 per cent to 8,702. The All Ordinaries lost 0.66 per cent to finish at 8,897. Mining stocks were hit particularly hard, while real estate also dragged on the index.
Energy was the notable exception, gaining more than one per cent as Brent crude traded above US$103 a barrel. Oil had moved higher amid uncertainty surrounding potential US diesel-export restrictions and broader geopolitical supply risks. The move supported energy producers but renewed concern about inflation inputs across transport and the wider economy.
Gold shares were weak even as spot bullion remained historically elevated. The All Ordinaries Gold index fell about 2.25 per cent, showing that equity performance can diverge from the commodity because of valuation, currency, operating and company-specific factors.
Zip was a prominent loser, falling 11.38 per cent after the company reported short sales after the previous close. Nine Entertainment also weakened after UBS analysts warned of near-term revenue challenges associated with its advertising-supported subscription tier.
Premier Investments led larger winners despite caution about the retail environment. Breville, in which Premier owns a significant stake, also appeared among leading movers. In the broader ASX 300 screen, Myer gained 11.43 per cent and MAAS Group rose 7.93 per cent, while Lotus Resources fell 10.53 per cent. These percentage moves should be checked against company announcements and trading liquidity before attributing causes.
The Australian dollar was broadly flat at US70.38 cents. Spot gold was around US$4,280 an ounce, Brent crude approximately US$103.08 a barrel and iron ore near US$96.90 a tonne late in the session.
The rate outlook remains the central domestic catalyst. Labour-market weakness has not eliminated the possibility of an RBA increase next week, leaving banks, listed property and other rate-sensitive sectors exposed to changing expectations.
Market dashboard
S&P/ASX 200: 8,702, down 0.72 per cent.
All Ordinaries: 8,897, down 0.66 per cent.
Best sector: Energy, up more than one per cent.
Weakest areas: Real estate and materials were the major drags; confirm final sector percentages before publication.
Material winner: Premier Investments led the large-company gainers. Confirm its final closing move from the ASX before publication.
Material loser: Zip, down 11.38 per cent.
ASX 300 percentage leader: Myer, up 11.43 per cent.
ASX 300 percentage laggard: Zip, down 11.38 per cent.
AUD/USD: Approximately US$0.7038, broadly flat.
The megamansion was built for Tony Pritzker, heir to the Hyatt Hotel fortune and brother of Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker.
New research suggests that bonuses make employees feel more like a mere cog in a wheel.