• Who We Are
    • The Climate Trust
    • Climate Trust Capital
    • Achievements
    • Leadership And Board Of Directors
  • What We Do
    • Action
    • Impact
    • Case Studies
  • Financials
  • Media
    • Blog
    • News & Press
The Climate Trust | The Role of Voluntary Carbon Markets

The Role of Voluntary Carbon Markets

Scorcher

Welcome back to TCT’s Scorcher series. We took a break for the summer, but we’re back with a weekly update on carbon markets and climate finance.

The Bottom Line: Voluntary carbon markets are playing an important role in mitigating the climate crisis.

Much of the recent debates around the integrity of carbon offsets has me asking the question, “What are carbon markets for?” Is the purpose of carbon markets to track GHG flows with 100% certainty and accuracy? Or are they intended to help society avoid the most dramatic impacts of climate change and ease the transition to a zero-carbon economy? While these goals might appear to go hand in hand, a myopic focus on super-precise measurement and modeling is threatening the significant climate gains accomplished through carbon markets and imperiling a growing flow of conservation and climate mitigation funding.

Market experts acknowledge the challenges in this evolving space but contend that, “the urgency for large-scale climate action outweighs the risk of VCM flaws which can be corrected on an ad-hoc basis […] VCMs are a necessary sandbox for innovation as well as a mechanism to bridge the divide between current challenges and a GHG conscious economy of the future.” [1]

According to the World Bank, “Carbon markets help mobilize resources and reduce costs to give countries and companies the space to smooth the low-carbon transition. It is estimated that trading in carbon credits could reduce the cost of implementing countries Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) by more than half—as much as $250 billion/year by 2030.” [2]

By August of 2021, annual transactions on the voluntary carbon market (VCM) had exceeded $748 million USD, bringing the estimated total of all VCM transactions to $6.7 billion for 1,728 MtCO2e sequestered. That is billions of dollars of private, voluntary finance invested in projects ranging from cook stoves, to landfill methane capture, to renewable energy, to forest and grassland conservation. [3] The climate impact of these projects is the equivalent of taking 372,330,834 gas powered cars off the road for a year, or 28,572,628,572 tree seedlings growing for 10 years.[4]

Of course, no one knows what would have happened in the absence of this market, but it is hard to see how this is not a big win for the climate. Much of the criticism of carbon markets has focused on how additionality is calculated and who gets to claim it. However, we need to recognize that the largely negative portrayal of carbon markets in the media often ignores recent market improvements and the enormous overall impact these markets have had on climate mitigation. Some critics claim that markets have been a distraction from needed regulation, but it is very unclear that such regulation would have been enacted in the absence of existing markets. Passing sweeping energy regulation, which would likely drive up the cost of energy and living, seems incredibly unlikely in our current political climate and could well lead to the kind of political backlash we have seen undo climate progress in the not-too-distant past.[5]

Journalists and the ever-increasing world of carbon offset rating agencies should take care walking the fine line between flagging the shortcomings of individual projects and jeopardizing a system that promises to deliver billions of additional dollars toward climate mitigation at a crucial moment. If criticism continues to be unbalanced, companies may feel they are exposing themselves to undue reputational risk by investing in offset projects and pull back to wait for the dust to settle. The world simply doesn’t have time to wait on a perfect system.

At TCT, we are focused on developing quality, nature-based carbon offset projects that deliver significant social and environmental co-benefits to their communities. The carbon benefits of these projects are always calculated according to conservative, scientific, peer-reviewed protocols that reflect the best current understanding of carbon flows and ensure that most projects will over-deliver on climate impacts. TCT also fully supports and advocates for a reduction first strategy for entities purchasing offsets. Offsets are our best strategy to augment emission reduction efforts, provide price control, and direct innovation towards the GHG conscious economy of the future.

 

Resources

  1. Miltenberger et al., 2021. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fclim.2021.686516/full
  2. www.ieta.org/resources/International_WG/Article6/CLPC_A6%20report_no%20crops.pdf
  3. Ecosystem Marketplace State of the Voluntary Carbon Market 2021: https://app.hubspot.com/documents/3298623/view/251152947?accessId=fd91dd
  4. https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator#results
  5. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/12/15/the-trump-administrations-major-environmental-deregulations/#:~:text=The%20Trump%20administration%20has%20replaced,name%20a%20few%5B1%5D
Tags
Adaptation
Aggregation
American Carbon Registry
Biochar
Blue Carbon
C-AGG
California Air Resources Board
California Carbon Info
Cap and Invest
carbon offset standards
Carbon Pricing
Carbon-Pulse
Clean Power Plan
Climate Action Reserve
Climate Bonds
Conservation Finance Network
Corporate Social Responsibility
CORSIA
Culture
Dairy Digester
Ecosystem Marketplace
Edible Portland
Energy Central
Environmental Defense Fund
Environmental Justice
EPAF
Farm Power Northwest
GreenBiz
IPCC
Job Announcement
Leadership
Low Carbon Fuel Standard
Milestone
Oregon Carbon Dioxide Standard
Oregon Clean Fuels Program
Oregon Energy Facility Siting Council
Oregon Global Warming Commission
Pacific Coast Action Plan on Climate and Energy
Paris
Portland General Electric
REDD
Renewable Fuel Standard
Renewable Identification Numbers
Request For Proposal
RGGI
Rice
Risk Management
Scientific American
Social Cost of Carbon
Supply Chain
Sustainable Business Oregon
Triple Pundit
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service
Verified Carbon Standard
Western Climate Initiative
Recent Comments
Leave a comment

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Cookie settingsACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Non-necessary
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
SAVE & ACCEPT
Proud Member Partners in Diversity
  • DONATE
  • CAREERS
  • CONTACT

©2020 The Climate Trust. Crafted by ILLUSIO