The author of the article, Elina Kajosaari, is a technology enthusiast with a strong sense of mission. She is from Finland, and her experience lies in fostering change and growth within the climate sector. As the CEO of the non-profit organisation Compensate, which deals with carbon dioxide removal, she explains why many carbon offsetting schemes fail to meet sustainability principles.

The voluntary carbon market is full of low-quality projects that do not deliver the promised climate benefits or have serious negative consequences, for instance, regarding biodiversity or human rights.

Individuals and companies, including many international corporations, use carbon credits issued within these projects to offset their emissions. However, by using this type of credit, which is literally flooding the current market, the offset may have little or even a negative impact on the climate.

As stated in the Compensate white paper, 90% of carbon offsetting projects that use nature-based solutions – most of which are certified according to international standards such as Verra or Gold Standard – do not meet our proprietary sustainability criteria.

Former Bank of England Governor Mark Carney's “Taskforce on Scaling Voluntary Carbon Markets” has identified similar problems, but although it includes 50 of the world’s largest international corporations, as well as other market participants, it offers guidelines with only a few recommended solutions. (...)

Here are five main reasons why carbon offsetting projects often fail to meet sustainability criteria!

5. Emission reductions are based on vague, imprecise projections.

4. Carbon credits cause conflicts within local communities.

3. Artificially inflated baseline emissions, which consequently create false promises regarding results.

2. Various risks to forests.

1. The project does not provide additional climate benefits compared to the situation if the project had not existed.