Carbon credits are a market-based mechanism designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by assigning a financial value to the carbon emissions created by companies or organizations. Companies or organizations can purchase carbon credits from other entities that have reduced their carbon emissions, thereby offsetting their own emissions.
For example, a company that generates a large amount of carbon emissions may decide to purchase carbon credits from a renewable energy project that generates clean energy, such as wind or solar power. By purchasing these credits, the company is essentially paying for the reduction of an equivalent amount of carbon emissions elsewhere, and can thus claim to be reducing their overall carbon footprint.
Being carbon neutral means that an organization or individual has achieved a balance between the carbon emissions they produce and the carbon emissions they have reduced or offset. This can be achieved through a combination of measures such as reducing energy consumption, using renewable energy sources, and purchasing carbon credits.
Many companies and organizations are striving to become carbon neutral as a way of demonstrating their commitment to sustainable practices and reducing their impact on the environment. But is it true?
There have been instances of fraud in carbon credit and carbon neutral advertising, which is a cause for concern in the industry.
One common form of fraud is when companies sell carbon credits that are not genuine, meaning that the carbon reductions they claim to have made have not actually occurred. This can happen when companies overestimate the amount of carbon emissions they have reduced or when they falsely claim that their projects are generating clean energy or reducing emissions in some other way.
Another form of fraud is when companies use vague or misleading language to describe their carbon reduction efforts. For example, a company may claim to be “carbon neutral” without specifying how they achieved this status or whether they have actually reduced their emissions in any meaningful way.
In addition, there have been instances of companies using unverifiable or unreliable methods for calculating their carbon emissions, which can lead to inaccurate claims about their carbon footprint and their efforts to reduce it.
Overall, it is important for consumers and stakeholders to be vigilant and to ask for evidence of the carbon reduction measures being taken by companies claiming to be carbon neutral or using carbon credits. This can help to ensure that the claims being made are accurate and credible, and that the overall impact on the environment is positive.
A test was conducted on 15 products at random in Belgian store shelves with a label of “Carbon Neutral”, these labels signify that the products didn’t release more carbon into the atmosphere than it took from it. Signifying a “green” product and alleviating the Climate Guilt consumers feel when purchasing these products. However, the study that was conducted showed that these companies ran at a Carbon positive output and purchased Carbon Credits as needed to offset their pollution. This allows them to legally market their products as “Carbon Neutral”.
“All claims consistently relied on the use of inappropriate carbon credits to offset the emissions associated with the product. Most of the credits were generated by either projects that reduce emissions through the installation of renewable energy capacity, or projects that store carbon in natural ecosystems, primarily forests.”
Assessing the carbon neutrality claims of products in Belgian supermarkets – Carbon Market Watch
In these cases, Carbon Credits act, not as a way of reducing carbon emissions, but acting as permission to pollute. Where this revenue goes is questionable, as it may go to a Carbon Credit farm, a solar or wind farm, or it may go to a trader who happened to buy these credits at a cheaper price. Introducing the volatility of speculation into the Carbon Emissions market.
“In the first case, there is a high risk that the achieved emission reductions are not additional, meaning that they would have happened anyway, regardless of the sale of carbon credits, because renewable energy projects’ profitability is rarely significantly affected by the sale of carbon credits.”
Assessing the carbon neutrality claims of products in Belgian supermarkets – Carbon Market Watch
Overall, the sudden increase of “Carbon Neutral” products is a lie in order to take advantage of people consciousness and sell more products.
“A main conclusion from this study is that all claims were found unlikely to be fully accurate, and instead are misleading for consumers, because the carbon credits purchased to offset emissions associated with the products simply do not deliver climate benefits that can be considered to be equivalent to the damages generated by the products.”
Assessing the carbon neutrality claims of products in Belgian supermarkets – Carbon Market Watch
- IoT devices are installed in buildings, factories, or vehicles to track and measure carbon credit generation from projects that are validated, verified and registered under endorsed and conditionally endorsed standards by ICROA or government-approved carbon crediting schemes
- The emissions data is securely transmitted to the KXCO platform that records the data in a tamper-proof manner.
- The platform calculates the total amount of carbon credits generated by the IoT devices and send the data through to a Governing Body, UN (Our UN registration: UNGM 902812), IETA (International Emissions Trading Association), ICROA (International Carbon Reduction and Offset Alliance) or suitable Authority, they then issue digital carbon credits back to KXCO on our Blockchain.
- The digital carbon credits are transferred to an exchange where they can be traded.
- Buyers of digital carbon credits retire the credits, which effectively cancels out the emissions generated by their own operations.
