Carbon Offset Schemes
The carbon offset market is growing fast and is very unregulated. A year ago there were about 20 Australian companies offering carbon offsets; now there’s close to 60. When you buy carbon offset, you pay to support projects that remove greenhouse gases (GHGs) like carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, or stop them getting there in the first place.
The Carbon offsets are sold to consumers and businesses to allow them to reduce their environmental impact. By buying an offset, you pay to support projects that remove greenhouse gases (GHGs) like carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, or stop them getting there in the first place. When too many GHGs build up in the atmosphere, the result is climate change.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) have raised concerns that, “Consumers may be facing misleading and deceptive conduct associated with this emerging market.” And a 2007 report by the University of Sydney found that the term ‘carbon neutral’ is being exploited for PR and financial purposes.
The concern is that well intentioned consumers, trying to do the right thing, are being taken for a ride. A company might say it’ll offset emissions you’re responsible for and gladly take
The obvious place to start is to check that the offsets the company is selling have been accredited by an independent standards scheme. The problem is there are many schemes in the market. Some are government schemes; others are from for-profit companies, non-profit NGOs and organisations with charitable status, both from Australia and overseas.
All very confusing!
My belief is that we shoul reduce our emissions first, buy green power and only use offsets as a last resort.
Personally, I donate to Trees For Life who have a large number of volunteers growing seedling native trees from locally collected seed to give to farmers and community groups who want to revegetate with local native trees. I don’t count the offsets but do contribute to helping encourage and retain the biodiversity in ourrural areas. I have been a memberof Trees for Life for many years and have persoannly planted many thousdand of tress, shrubs and understorey plants. I used to propagate local ground covers when I lived in a rural area.
September 25th, 2008 at 10:58 pm
Jean, I have several problems with carbon offsetting through tree planting.
1. Ultimately there are limits to how many trees you can plant before you start taking land away from food crops and/or displacing native forrests.
2. With some exceptions trees are not a vey efficient carbon storage mechanism. They are slower growing than may other crops and have to yield the carbon back to the atmosphere in a roughly 100 year time frame, as long as some keeps looking after them for that timeframe.
3. Large plantations can easily become a carbon source in the event of mismangement and/or wildfires. I predict there will be a few “convenient” fires in the next few decades as all the cheap tree planting land is used up.
4. I am an advocate for carbon offset funds going into CO2 emissions displacement technologies, in particular solar hot water, biomass cogeneration, landfill methane cogeneration and wind generation. There are a host of others. Promoting these can cause a structural change in our economy that planting trees will not.
My technical background is in sugar industry cogeneration. I would be happy to outline the potential and benefits some time if you are interested, perhaps on a web forum. I would like to convince one or more of those 60 funds you mentioned to take a fresh approach to carbon offsetting.
regards
James
September 30th, 2008 at 5:02 am
Thank you James.
I agree! I don’t like most of the “sticks in the ground” schemes. Personally I have supported Trees for life for many years, many because I believe they generally improve the local environments and provide habitats that can help maintain diversity. I don’t consider them as a carbon offset
I think there is a lot of potential for Sugar and Bamboo and similar giant grasses because they form special nodules or carbon “rocks” near their roots that last for a VERY long time. These are great for carbon sequestration!
Not as “sexy” for politicians to “sell” for wasting money on research. They prefer something that sounds higher tech! Don’t I sound cynical!