Fresh evidence published by the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) confirms the unsuitability of carbon offsetting to meet emissions targets, echoing the findings of a new Carbon Market Watch study that casts doubt over the fairness of financial flows in the voluntary carbon market (VCM).
In this joint statement, 80 civil society organisations, including Carbon Market Watch, express their opposition to the use of carbon credits for offsetting purposes and the recent move towards relaxing rules surrounding indirect scope 3 emissions, such as the recent controversy at the Science-based Targets initiative (SBTi). Climate targets must focus primarily on the reduction …
Read more “Why carbon offsetting undermines climate targets – Joint NGO statement”
As Euro 2024 kicks off, the tournament has been caught offside with some of its climate claims. UEFA must do better to tackle its carbon footprint.
What do camels, whales and breast-fed babies have in common? They’ve all been put forward as ways to offset emissions. We delve into some of the weirdest carbon crediting ideas and explain why they do not work for the climate.
Biodiversity markets are meant to channel private sector funding towards schemes that aim to conserve and restore biodiversity. In its current form, the unregulated funding schemes are reminiscent of the voluntary carbon market, which has a track record of supplying poor quality, cheap credits that inadequately transfer funds to the Global South.
Carbon Market Watch welcomes the opportunity to submit input to India’s Central Consumer Protection Authority’s draft guidelines on greenwashing.
Carbon Market Watch strongly condemns the SBTi Board of Trustees’ announcement to recognise carbon credits as a way to “abate” scope 3 emissions. These indirect, value chain emissions usually make up the lion’s share of a company’s carbon footprint.
At a time when global carbon emissions need to be almost halved by 2030, 51 major corporations’ climate commitments amount only to reducing their median carbon footprint by as little as 30%, reveals the 2024 Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor. Tighter regulations from governments are needed to raise the bar, both for companies which are taking insufficient action, and those who are not doing anything at all.
Is offsetting fine if it is done with highly durable carbon removal credits? Sabine Frank weighs the pros and cons.
The first carbon credits issued under the UN’s CORSIA offsetting scheme will do nothing to bring down the aviation sector’s sky high emissions.
Stay in touch and receive our monthly newsletter, campaign updates, event invites and more.
