The podcast discusses the state of the voluntary carbon market, the scrutiny on carbon offsets, and the implications for companies and governments. They explore the acquisition of Carbon Engineering by an oil company and the debate surrounding oil companies' involvement in carbon removal. The chapter also highlights challenges and concerns in carbon markets, including shady deals and the need for stronger standards. Additionally, they discuss capital backing for DAC technology, NOAA's awards for marine CDR research, and recent scientific funding projects for carbon removal in the marine environment.
Increasing scrutiny and criticism have caused a decrease in demand for carbon offsets in the voluntary carbon market, potentially pushing the market towards a tipping point.
The involvement of fossil fuel companies in the carbon removal industry, such as Oxy's acquisition of carbon engineering, sparks debate about perpetuating the status quo versus bringing capital and longer time horizons.
Deep dives
Scrutiny of Carbon Offsets and Tipping Points in the Voluntary Carbon Market
Demand for carbon offsets in the voluntary carbon market has decreased recently due to increasing scrutiny and criticism. Notably, a study published in Science revealed that many red plus projects are less beneficial than claimed. Shady deals and questionable forest carbon deals have also raised skepticism. This skepticism, combined with concerns about the integrity of offsets, may push the market towards a tipping point. Companies and governments relying on carbon removal to fill the gap may need to find more reliable offset options.
Assessing the Integrity of Carbon Offsets and the Fairness of Judging
There is debate about whether it is fair to judge carbon offsets harshly based on current knowledge. While some older projects may have had unrealistic historical baselines, recent projects should have known better. The scientific community is striving to establish more meaningful guidelines to ensure integrity. However, the negative perception of bad projects could tarnish the entire field of carbon offsets.
Companies' Reaction to the Declining Confidence in Offsets
Some companies continue to actively engage in the offset market, such as Microsoft, Shopify, and JP Morgan Chase. However, others, like Shell, have recently scrapped offset purchases. Despite initial setbacks, companies are likely to pivot and focus on industrial removals rather than avoiding emissions reductions. The challenge lies in effectively communicating the distinction between removals and avoided emissions to investors and the public.
The Role of Oil Companies in the Carbon Removal Industry
The acquisition of carbon engineering by Oxy, an oil company, has sparked debate about the involvement of fossil fuel companies in the carbon removal industry. Some see it as a positive step, bringing capital, practical expertise, and a longer time horizon. Others worry it may perpetuate the status quo and be perceived as greenwashing. The industry's complex relationship with oil companies and concerns about technological lock-in are key points of discussion.
The voluntary carbon market (VCM) has a total value of over $2 billion, and some predictions show it growing to $10 billion in just a few years.
But the integrity of the carbon offsets available has come under increasing scrutiny in recent years, causing demand to slow and prices to go down.
According to a new report from Morgan Stanley the market is approaching a ‘tipping point’, as more and more companies hesitate to stake their environmental claims on offsets that may be debunked in the newspaper the next day.
If the market does hit a tipping point, what’s next? And what does it mean for the companies and governments hoping that “carbon removal” can fill the gap with a more reliable type of offset?
Our panel will take a look at implications of the oil company Oxy purchasing Carbon Engineering. Is big oil good for DAC?
Whether or not oil and gas should be involved in carbon removal is healthy debate within the CDR community, and this announcement made headlines in the broader environmental media too.
Listen to hear what our policy panel, Holly Buck and Wil Burns, think about this news and its aftermath.