Voluntary Carbon Standard

How do we know that when purchasing carbon offsets we are getting what we paid for?

One attempt to answer this question is the Voluntary Carbon Standard (PDF) which has just been released. Website with related documents here. I haven't read this yet, but if you do, let me know what you think...is this a reasonable system?

[UPDATE] The WWF don't approve (PDF, Article)
[UPDATE] The WWF/FOE/Greenpeace Gold Standard would be my recommendation for personal offsets.

Home del.icio.us Digg This!

UK Environmental Audit Committe Release Report on Carbon Offsets

The UK parliament's environmental audit committe has just release it's latest report.





The committee chairman Tim Yeo highlighted the damage cause by poorly run schemes, perticularly in preventing people from making the valuable step of offsetting there emissions due to lack of trust:

“We are concerned that prospects for growth in carbon offsetting, and the accompanying benefits in terms of lower global emissions, are being held back by suspicions that a lack of regulation and transparency in the market is allowing some schemes to be promoted which do not achieve acceptable outcomes. This is a pity in view of the contribution offsetting can make to tackling climate change."

Tim also pointed to the opportunity that the British govornment has in developing robust standards for effective offsets.

“The UK has the opportunity to lead the world in developing robust and helpful guidance. An effective government code of practice which endorses meaningful offsets could assist people in choosing the best way to offset their emissions."

The leadership currently present in London with regards carbon trading was highlighted as territory worth maintaining.

“The UK's financial and carbon markets have much to gain from a rapid growth in what is increasingly seen as a vital component of commercial activity and corporate responsibility.”

Home del.icio.us Digg This!

Carbon Planet Update/Upgrade

Carbon offset/audit company Carbon Planet have made a few changes, including the addition of energy saving measures to the kind of carbon offsets that they offer.

They are also offering CDM Gold Standard credits to business customers.

Description of how Carbon Planet deals with Additionality, Permenance, Leakage and other technical but vitally important aspects of a real carbon offset can be found here.

On the topic of offsets, i know that an increasing number of people are using these services for living a low carbon life, but i`m interested to know if anyone has thought of taking this further. I like the term Carbon Trail to describe our personal historic responsibilities...our footprint is what our lives rest on currently, our trail represents our past livestyles. If a significant number of people would decide to take this step I think that we would have a really healthy trend, and its no-loss. By definition we have additionality as we are sorting out our past not offseting a current behaviour.

Home del.icio.us Digg This!

Corporate Climate Response: Day 2 (Offsetting)

The emissions from the conference where offset by The Carbon Neutral Company and travel emissions by Climate Care.

Climate Care is one of only two offset providers that i have actually offset with in the past. I like the type of projects that they carry out, i trust them and i like there whole ethos. The Carbon Neutral Company used to be called Future Forests but have now change from this, in part because of the slack that afforestation has received in the UK media and in part because they where becoming overexposed to risks related to replanting forests if anything killed them off. I think that speaks volumes.

There seemed to be very different views coming from the panel, and the audience had some very pointed questions. On the claim being used by some large businesses that they are going CarbonNeutral by virtue of buying green power there was a scathing attack from Mike Mason of Climate Care. There is double counting--Twice!

As these companies are bying green power and then selling the Renewable Obligation Certificates (ROCs) apparent double counting is obvious. Power companies are legally obliged to create a certain amount of green power. The ROCs represent this power, if they are not retired by the company purchasing the green power, then it simply isn't green--no scarcity and absolutely no net effect. This trick has been picked up by many people.

What hasn't been picked up however is a far more subtle kind of double counting. The UK government has emissions targets under the EU ETS. If reductions in the form of offsets are made, the government therefore has to put in fewer green policies! That might mess with your mind a bit but it is a serious concern, if the carbon offsetting business continues to grow then are the government having a free ride on consumers of the offsets? This is clearly only the issue for domestic projects, not those in the developing world but Climate Care would like to do some projects in the UK and DEFRA refused to wipe reduce its carbon budget by the amount being offset in the UK. That is a fascinating story that I have never hear before.

These are details: i have stated in the past that i support well managed carbon offsets and that is still the case. More on carbon offsets later.

Home del.icio.us Digg This!

Carbon Offsets: Development, Reccomendations and Warnings

I have commented on carbon offsets several times before. I currently have no problem with the use of carbon offsets if they work.

Perhaps that sounds obvious but many greens seem to be weary, not only for practical reasons--and there are a lot of dodgy services out there--but for a whole range of other reasons that i wont venture into here.

If you want to buy a carbon offset then they key desire is for the offset to be genuine, secondary issues such as the affect of the offset on local people and ecosystems are also important.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Personal Recommendation: MyClimate (Via Sustainable Travel Intnl)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Is one tone of emissions reduction actually one tone?

• Additionality: Is the project being used to claim reductions only happening due to your funding?

If afforestation is used in your carbon offsets you have the added issues of:

• Permanence: You have to be sure that the carbon will remain 'locked up'.
• Leakage: Are you sure that new trees won't push farmers onto new land such as old forest which will invalidate the project?
  

2. Are the projects that you are funding environmentally and socially benign?

• In the case of forestry you have to deal with biodiversity, indigenous rights and wider environmental impacts such as affects on hydrological regime.
• In the case of energy efficiency/renewables projects are the schemes on an appropriate scale and do they have health benefits?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A couple of good reports on carbon offsets: Exploring the Market for Voluntary Carbon Offsets and Voluntary Offsets for Air Travel Emissions (Tufts Univ.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Key Points:

• Caution is advised, regulation is likely to come into place in the coming years but the industry is at a very early stage.
• Additionality and permanence are virtually impossible to grantee for forestry projects as the effects of climate change on forests are unclear.
  
• In terms of transparency and rigour, offsets coming out of the NSW forestry projects are amongst the best around. Carbon Planet uses credits from these sources. In terms of benefits to biodiversity TreeFlights is one of the best companies around; it is arguable that it might be worth buying e.g twice the emissions offsets from organisations like these to ensure that you are truly carbon neutral as well as supporting reforestation with diverse native species.
• To be guaranteed real and permanent carbon offsets, the best option may well be to avoid sequestration and use projects that involve sustainable development and energy efficiency in the developing world. MyClimate carries out such projects, descriptions of its projects here.

A little more information about MyClimate

Quote from Tufts University Report:

"Despite the high price of their offsets, myclimate’s high project standards, its transparency and good calculator makes it an excellent choice for offsetting air travel emissions."

From Report By REEP:

MyClimate (Switzerland), an NGO founded in 2002 as a spin-off from the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (Switzerland), offers offsets for air travel and advisory services on carbon management, project development, and environmental communication.

Its target markets include individuals, travel agencies, and companies. Projects meet CDM criteria and follow Gold Standard guidelines; however, the projects are too small to meet the transaction costs necessary to register under CDM.

MyClimate invests only in renewable energy or energy efficiency projects in developing countries, but specifically states that it does not support forestry sinks projects due to the risk that the carbon might be released back into the atmosphere in the long term. Projects include solar power water heaters in Eritrea and Costa Rica, biomass in India, and methane to sewage in South Africa. Local sustainable development and strict additionality rules are claimed to be foremost priorities for MyClimate. A ‘team of experts’ from the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology is responsible for verifying the projects.

The cost to the customer is EUR 7 / 1000 km for shorthaul flights and EUR 4.5/ 1000 km for long-haul flights, roughly yielding EUR 23/tCO2e.

UK Environmental Audit Committe launch enquiry into offseting.

Who has written on this before (other green blogs): WorldChanging, Grist, Treehugger

Home del.icio.us Digg This!

Self Flagellation and Carbon Offsets

I just read a post on the Low Carbon Kid blog about certification of carbon offsets.

The fact that it approached what is a very valuable project from a very negative angle prompted me to leave the following comments. I have been thinking about offsets for some time, here are my current thoughts. This will be controversial. But i`m not into popularity contests, there is serious work to be done in tackling climate change!

Responses wellcome.

Carbon offsets. A grey issue where businesses are saying, ohh this is great, a great way to save the environment and make money...then just making money, and where environmentalists get all het up and anti-capitalist.

A dose of rationality anyone?

Surely the rational response to a flexible system for taking responsibility for your emissions is to make sure the emissions really are offset i.e to regulate not to bitch about people not getting it?

What exactly are we meant to get? If i am volunteering to pay so that clean energy can be subsidised over coal or energy efficient measure can be put in place then what is wrong with that?

Regulations can rule out land use offsets (preferably) or demand insurance to guarantee permanence. If a good energy efficient project is done to a high standard then the uncertainty should be relatively low...therefore you can buy 50% more offset and know that it is very likely that you are at least carbon neutral and probably carbon negative!

To describe offsetting from a different angle. You could offset your own emissions. Chose your budget, then if you seem to be getting near that limit you spend enough money to ensure you will stay bellow the limit. Perhaps to much driving leads to a few hundred pounds in loft insulation.

Now if you live in a new house then saving might be costly but perhaps your neighbour has a draughty house, wouldn't it make sense to buy them the insulation or draft stripping and save more energy for less cost? Perhaps even CFL's?

Make this bigger, why not go wherever the price of mitigation is cheapest, as long as the scheme is verifiable and fair to the people affected then why is it wrong?

Is environmentalism about self-flagellation or progress?

Quite frankly, if people verifiably offset there emissions then YES they are not climate criminals by flying! They are not harming the climate so what right do you as a climate activist have to criticise them?
---
Rant over, i have never been entirely in line with what you say but i have been at a stage where i wouldn't fly because i was uncertain of the issues. That is over, i`m clear now, there was no reason for this other then social mores within the environmental movement. I don't have plans to fly anywhere but would feel quite happy to do so as long as i take my responsibility for the climate seriously and verify a good climate offset project.

Home del.icio.us Digg This!