U.S. Carbon Trading Lacks Credibility, Says GAO
permalink
Carbon trading has gotten its fare share of skepticism, but it seems that the U.S. market just got a little more.
A report by the Government Accountability Office found that the $100 million voluntary U.S. carbon offsets market offers consumers “limited assurance of credibility.” The government organization based these findings on the information provided by their offset purchases from 33 retail providers.
Offset projects become credible when they are transparent, detailing what the consumer — whether individual or corporate — is buying, when they create measurable reductions in emissions, and, when a system is in place to assure that projects are only counted once.
The report states, “It is difficult for consumers to determine the quality of the offsets they purchased” without an independent third party registry to monitor and track projects to stop the projects from being counted multiple times.
Without an organization giving projects stamps of approval, consumers cannot trust how much their purchases affect the planet. They cannot be sure whether their carbon offset credit card affects their plane tickets, nor can they trust the advertisements of carbon projects. A registry would encourage the offset marketplace and give credence to their green marketing.
As is, the current U.S. market is not completely unmonitored. The Gold Standard Foundation and the Voluntary Carbon Standard set clear standards for the projects they review. Though these organizations are making strides in making U.S. carbon trading more legitimate, without a unified registry, the market will continue to lack credibility.
The field is growing fast. Individuals are looking to green their daily lives by minimizing their carbon footprint. Corporations are including carbon offset programs as part of their green initiatives. Regional marketplaces are forming, with the northeast having its first regional carbon trading auction last week. Some experts foresee the industry growing to $1 billion over the next several years. Such rapid growth begs the question, if the marketplace is only set to get bigger, why not make efforts to encourage stability and accountability now?
Though industry members have long proclaimed similar concerns and have long urged for the creation of a central registry, because the GAO is an investigative arm of Congress, as the Wall Street Journal asserts, its findings could possibly have lasting impacts on Washington.
By Teresa Herrmann, at The Element Agency in New York .


