Demand for low-quality offsets by major companies undermines climate integrity of the voluntary carbon market

Gregory Trencher (), Sascha Nick, Jordan Carlson and Matthew Johnson
Additional contact information
Gregory Trencher: Kyoto University
Sascha Nick: Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL)
Jordan Carlson: Kyoto University
Matthew Johnson: Universität Hamburg

Nature Communications, 2024, vol. 15, issue 1, 1-15

Abstract: Abstract Most companies include carbon offsets in their net-zero strategy. However, many offset projects are poor quality and fail to reduce emissions as claimed. Here we focus on the twenty companies retiring the most offsets from the voluntary carbon market over 2020–2023. We examine if their offsets could be considered high quality and likely to benefit the climate. We curate an original company-level dataset to examine quality and climate benefits across four dimensions: (1) use of offsets from low/high-risk project types; (2) age of projects and credits; (3) price of credits; and (4) country of implementation. We find that companies have predominantly sourced low-quality, cheap offsets: 87% carry a high risk of not providing real and additional emissions reductions, with most offsets originating from forest conservation and renewable energy projects. Further, most offsets do not meet industry standards regarding age and country of implementation. These findings provide further evidence that the voluntary carbon market is not supporting effective climate mitigation. Particularly, we show that its persisting quality issues are exacerbated by the demand for low-quality offsets by individual companies.

Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-51151-w Abstract (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:nat:natcom:v:15:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-024-51151-w

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.nature.com/ncomms/

DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-51151-w

Access Statistics for this article

Nature Communications is currently edited by Nathalie Le Bot, Enda Bergin and Fiona Gillespie

More articles in Nature Communications from Nature
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().