The Problems with Carbon Off-setting

Carbon off-setting is a simple idea, balance the carbon emissions that you create by doing something eco-friendly that will absorb that amount of carbon to reduce the net contribution to global climate change. For example, a long haul plane journey will create a large amount of carbon, so paying a little more to plant some trees to absorb carbon dioxide equivalent to the amount created by the journey might seem like a good idea. Plantations themselves can be a good, although they should be well planned and contain a variety of native species, but there are a few problems with the idea of carbon off-setting:

1. Carbon off-setting is not a long-term solution. Carbon off-setting that claims to reduce the production of greenhouse gases now will not be able to do so in the future. For instance, a forest will be able to absorb a finite amount of carbon, so will only be reliable carbon sink for perhaps 20 years. After this period this avenue to offset carbon will be closed. We can only grow so many forests, we can’t offset forever; soon even the idea offsetting could become redundant.

2. It usually takes time for carbon to be off-set. Many off-setting schemes give the impression that their effects will be immediate, but this is rarely the case. The time taken to off-set the emissions from a car perhaps 1 year may take 15 years or more. We need to act now to reduce control climate change; methods which have such a delay in their effect should not be seen as a viable option. There are many scientists who consider the next 10 years to be a critical period in which to reduce climate change.

3. No lifestyle changes are required. There need to real changes in the way that we use fossil fuels and create energy in order to reduce future climate change and off-setting schemes do not encourage these changes. Such schemes allow us to delay action and continue habits that have a detrimental effect on climate change. Why change our habits if we can neutralise their effect on the environment anyway?

4. Future return cannot be guaranteed. It isn’t possible to equate CO2 absorbed by trees with CO2 emitted. Off-setting schemes often have problems that meaning they don’t absorb as much carbon as planned. If a forest is planted in the wrong area or uses an unsuitable tree species it may have less trees then planned and absorb less carbon as a result. Not enough is known about the carbon cycle for us to make accurate predictions on the effectiveness of carbon absorption by trees.



5. Off-setting schemes encourage individual rather than group action. Most carbon off-setting promotes individual action and does not promote the change in public opinion that is needed to tackle the climate change issue. Changes in public opinion will give political leaders the confidence to act in a positive way to reduce to reduce climate change, give companies with good green credentials better reputations and ultimately lead to a lack of ecological awareness becoming socially unacceptable.



The science behind off-setting schemes is sometimes questionable, as is their effectiveness in many cases, but such schemes are beneficial to our environment and I personally think they should be continued, although some should perhaps reconsider the claims that they make. Investing in renewable energy projects or in increasing energy efficiency is a step in the right direction, but it is important to remember the ultimate goal of a reduction in carbon emissions. Action to reduce CO2 emissions needs more immediate lifestyle changes; off-setting can be the start of a more structured plan to conserve what we need.