By Tina Reine, Chief Commercial Officer of Zefiro Methane Corp
From the cleanup efforts at hundreds of Superfund sites to thousands of unplugged oil and gas wells leaking potentially harmful toxins into critical land and drinking water resources, communities throughout America are depending on government and commercial entities’ ability to successfully carry out a myriad of environmental remediation projects. These pressing initiatives will require a sustained level of financial commitment from various stakeholders, and it is critical that all interested parties have access to every possible option to help foster hard-earned progress.
In the fight to help forge a healthier, cleaner future for the next generation of Americans, one of the most innovative tools at our disposal are carbon credits. These credits are validated by third-party auditors and provide companies and private citizens alike the opportunity to invest in a wide range of environmentally focused projects.
While the funding allocated through these credits has proven to be effective at advancing key conservation and remediation efforts, high-profile voluntary carbon credit market participants, such as a number of leading financial institutions and global entertainment superstars, are increasingly becoming targets for misdirected scorn. These critics erroneously periodically claim that carbon credits only serve as a public relations scheme designed to allow bad-faithed companies and irresponsible, affluent individuals to continue over-polluting the environment.
Although this position can be linked to unverified carbon offsets, their campaign to slow the rapid growth of this sector has the potential to negatively impact high-quality, validated carbon credit offerings that advance universally endorsed environmental remediation projects. This was highlighted by the recent controversy at the Science Based Targets initiative (“SBTi”), a United Nations sponsored entity to help companies reach Paris Climate Agreement-set emissions goals. This incident was ignited by the organization’s endorsement of carbon credits, and while misguided attempts to overturn this endorsement ultimately failed, it showcases how this false narrative can upend positive momentum on emissions reduction efforts.
What those who target SBTi or a leading public figure’s stance on carbon credits might not understand is that these products are not an “IOU” to do a bit of environmental good at a date to be named later. In fact, many of the offerings at the heart of the voluntary carbon credit marketplace are making an immediate difference in communities that need this kind of investment. Whether it’s my colleagues’ efforts to reduce harmful methane emissions across the country or the non-profit initiatives aimed at advancing vital forestation work, investments in these credits (which are only issued after verifiable environmental cleanup has occurred) are an important component of confronting a growing list of public health threats.
In addition to glossing over carbon credits’ ability to advance essential environmental remediation initiatives, many skeptics also seem to forget that they are not targeting a marketplace built on the forced compliance of its participants – they are attacking those seeking a cleaner future. These investors do not have to purchase these credits – they are doing so to counteract the potential environmental harm linked to their commercial operations, help ensure their carbon footprint remains in-line with the average citizen and promote additional positive change. At a time when environmental policy can shift at a moment’s notice, privatized solutions that keep capital flowing into emissions reduction projects should be celebrated, not criticized.
Our worst-case scenario is that the continued attacks on carbon credits creates an environment in which other potential customers become convinced that making these investments is not worth the reputational risk. Removing these financial resources from the system would not only have dire consequences for the countless ongoing projects that rely on this critical funding – it would all but signal to the private markets that they should not bother participating in these efforts at all.
Instead of allowing ourselves to get baited into an unending series of unnecessary squabbles, it is time for key public and private sector stakeholders to work together to help unleash the potential of the carbon credit industry – for the tangible benefits of a cleaner society. While this more-than-pesky threat to the market is something that we must continue guarding against, the focus must remain on the overwhelming potential of this sector. Carbon credits are not only one of the most proven, successful methods of helping build a better future in a manner that accounts for the needs of modern society, they represent the long awaited ‘win-win’ commercial solution to help our communities move into a greener, healthier era.
Tina Reine is the Chief Commercial Officer of Zefiro Methane Corp., a nationwide comprehensive methane emissions reduction provider.
Any opinions published in this commentary reflect the views of the author and not of Carbon Pulse.
