— a government-backed program that started life as the National Carbon Offset Standard in 2010, and as "Greenhouse Friendly" before that.According to its website, the program assists businesses in reducing their greenhouse gas emissions, and that by "supporting businesses with the Climate Active trademark, you are supporting climate action".
"Climate Active receives significant income from certificates and other things. Is that enough to constitute trade or commerce?Part of the Australia Institute's criticism stems from what, under the Climate Active certification system, is termed "emissions boundaries" — things that are inside or outside of consideration, depending on the type of certification being granted.
Gas exploration and development company Cooper Energy also displays its carbon-neutral certification prominently on its website and in sustainability reports, and claims to be Australia's first carbon-neutral domestic gas supplier.
"You really have to go quite deep into the certification. You have to understand different terminology in relation to carbon accounting — scopes, supply chains, downstream emissions.last month, nearly 60 per cent of the 1,012 people surveyed said that all emissions from a business's "operations, products and services" should be included in claims of carbon neutrality.
"The ordinary consumer doesn't have a great technical knowledge, and you would take that into account." Sasha Titchkosky is a co-founder of Koskela, an Australia-made and -based furniture and design company. "I really wasn't aware ... companies were claiming they were Climate Active, carbon-neutral certified, but only looking at their scope 1 and 2 emissions."Ms Titchkosky quickly became disenchanted with the scheme, and has since withdrawn Koskela from Climate Active's program.
But Ms Hemming says there's little to no evidence that Climate Active is policing the hierarchy, and that many certified companies appear to be using offsets as a first point of call."There's never been any requirement to really demonstrate year-on-year that you actually are reducing [emissions] before you offset."
These include Australian Carbon Credit Units issued by the Clean Energy Regulator, and international units called Certified Emissions Reductions from Clean Development Mechanism projects, issued per the rules of the Kyoto Protocol.
Offsetting their carbon which would have helped reduce effects maybe 50 years ago but not anymore. They should have been planting trees then, too late now.
Is the ABC carbon neutral? If I watch ABC on my TV that runs on energy produced from a gas or coal plant, should the downstream CO2 I release be attributed to the producer of energy, or the product that I Watch when burning it? End user demand creates 100% of human CO2 output.
It's a paperwork carbon neutral. Obviously, not of any use as the planets emissions are still increasing after 2 decades and $Trillions. Go figure.
Disingenuous smoke and mirrors scheme looking after rich polluters.
The Big Green Lie Almost Everyone Claims to Believe, That carbon dioxide is a pollutant
Meanwhile, china just commissioned even more coals plants So for every thing Australia does. China has already undone it. Total scam
How can the world be so gullible about a gas that supports growth of all organic matter and cools the earth?