A recent review has concluded that the ineffectiveness of carbon offsets in reducing greenhouse gas emissions stems not from a few ineffective projects, but from entrenched systemic issues within the carbon crediting system. This assessment, drawn from two decades of research, identifies persistent quality problems in many major carbon credit programs. Despite initiatives taken by the industry and diplomats to improve the system, new regulations established at a UN climate summit have not adequately addressed the quality concerns.
Carbon offsets are designed to allow wealthy polluters to fund emission-reducing projects abroad while continuing to emit greenhouse gases domestically. Ideally, this system would channel resources to areas where they could have the most significant impact on global warming. However, voluntary carbon markets face challenges due to the presence of “junk offsets” that exaggerate their effectiveness.
The review highlights critical challenges in the carbon offsetting process, including issuing credits for projects that would happen regardless, temporary solutions like tree planting that may not survive climate events, localized pollution resulting from protected areas, and issues with double-counting emissions reductions. The study emphasizes that even if an offset is valid in most dimensions, deficiencies in just one area can significantly undermine its reported effectiveness.
Additionally, a separate meta-analysis indicates that less than 16% of carbon credits reviewed led to verifiable reductions in emissions. Experts suggest that while there are systemic issues, some projects could still be adjusted to ensure better outcomes.
Current efforts to reform the market include the establishment of the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market, which reviews the effectiveness of offsetting schemes. The authors of the review recommend phasing out ineffective offsets and advocating for funding models that do not allow donors to negate their emissions. However, they note potential for improvement in specific areas, suggesting some projects could still be viable within a restructured framework.
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/oct/06/carbon-offsets-fail-cut-global-heating-intractable-systemic-problems-study