A carbon offset represents a metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent that is either avoided or removed from the atmosphere.  The creation of a carbon offset involves the justification of a specific activity that goes above and beyond “business as usual.” Justification is awarded when outside parties agree that the project results in an overall benefit to our atmosphere, which would be easy if our industries, ecosystems, and atmosphere were all metered.  On the surface, one would think that purchasing carbon offsets would be a task void of decision making.  An apple is an apple, right?

To understand carbon offset basics and the variety that exists, read this June 2010 featured article in the International Society of Sustainability Professionals (ISSP) online journal, Insight:  http://bit.ly/az71AY

Climate mitigation, like all social and environmental movements, involves a change in our governance, cultural norms, education, and economy. Through purchase power a consumer can instigate minor shifts within each of these. The purchase of or investment in carbon offsets will continue to catalyze a reduction in GHG emissions in our atmosphere – if, like any other commodity, we are duly diligent and understand the characteristics, attributes, and features of what we buy.

There’s been a great surge of action among businesses who are eager to be responsible corporate citizens by measuring and reducing their carbon footprints.  ClearSky Climate Solutions has helped several businesses be completely carbon neutral, by measuring their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and retiring an equivalent number of certified carbon offsets to balance their carbon output.

Many businesses are going carbon neutral - but is it necessary?

Recently, a client of ours posed an interesting question: “Is it absolutely necessary to follow the fad and become a carbon-neutral business?”  The motivation behind this question wasn’t that they’re skeptical about climate change, or that they don’t feel a responsibility to reduce their company’s carbon footprint.  Rather, they were wondering if there is a level of GHG pollution that’s actually sustainable, given the fact that our earth’s natural processes are able to store a large quantity of CO2 every year.

This is an excellent question!  For example, the world’s oceans absorb ~2 Gt carbon/year.  We also know that forests have a huge potential to absorb carbon, but actually this sink is now a source of atmospheric carbon due to deforestation and land-use changes.  Fossil fuel burning contributes ~6 Gt carbon/year to the atmosphere.  Theoretically, then, we only need to reduce our global GHG emissions by 67% in order to achieve a sustainable level of CO2 emissions that the oceans could absorb, assuming that we can halt the problem of deforestation. If this is the case, then a business could reduce or offset 67% of their carbon footprint and claim to be atmospherically sustainable – right?

The issue with this approach is that the earth is already way over-budget in atmospheric carbon.   Global CO2 concentrations are currently 389 ppm, and scientific consensus says we need to reduce to 350 ppm in order to avoid significant temperature rise.  Also, the excess carbon that we’ve been emitting for the past 100 years has a very long residence time in the atmosphere, meaning that it’s not going to be absorbed very quickly.  Finally, those of us in the USA and Europe are responsible for the vast majority of the CO2 in the atmosphere, even if China has recently surpassed our rate of pollution.  Therefore, we don’t have the luxury of choosing a sustainable level of CO2 emissions – it’s our responsibility to reduce our carbon emissions as much as possible, as quickly as possible.  After reducing, offsetting the remaining carbon footprint and becoming  carbon neutral is one of the best ways for businesses to take full responsibility for their climate impacts.