The most ambitious attempt to set a high standard for carbon offsets is getting left behind as exchanges start trading contracts before the rules are finalized.
The Taskforce on Scaling Voluntary Carbon Markets, launched by former Bank of England Governor Mark Carney and Standard Chartered CEO Bill Winters, is populated by hundreds of bankers, airline executives, sustainability experts, commodities traders, scientists and other business leaders.
On Thursday, after almost a year of internal wrangling, the group set out its final recommendations for how to define an offset, a sort of token that companies might use to cancel out their pollution.
The next step is to establish a governance body that would determine a set of rules — based on the taskforce’s recommendations — to drive up demand for credits that deliver on their climate promises.
However, commodity exchanges in Chicago and Singapore are rushing to start trading contracts this year, before the standards have been decided upon, raising concerns the taskforce could fail to provide any kind of structure to a market that already has no government oversight.
Getting the contours of the market right could create a powerful weapon in the fight against climate change by funneling much-needed money to important environmental projects around the world.
However, encouraging the trading of contracts without clear rules about what a high-quality offset is and how the credits should be used to account for a company’s total emissions could have devastating consequences. Companies could use questionable offsets as a license to keep polluting, resulting in more carbon dioxide accumulating in the atmosphere.
DEFINING OFFSETS
A key objective of the taskforce is to come up with a Core Carbon Principle (CCP) label that would be used to mark offsets that meet its standards, akin to how groceries might be labeled as organic. Members have spent months arguing over the criteria for inclusion, with sharp divides over how high to set the bar, even as companies have been itching to start trading.
“We need to build this thing and launch it,” said Institute of International Finance president and CEO Tim Adams, who is helping to organize the taskforce.
Sonja Gibbs, another official at the institute, said that the taskforce has already done a large part of the legwork to define the principles, giving direction to anyone wanting to adopt them now.
The non-binding recommendations issued on Thursday suggest that: No offsets should be excluded from the market, although “high-quality” credits should get a special label; each credit should be tagged with “additional attributes” such as its location, or whether it removes carbon dioxide; there should be a robust legal framework behind all credits sold.
The hope is that the planned governance body will nail down the criteria for a high quality “CCP” label so that trading can start next year, but some exchanges aren’t waiting. CME Group, one of the world’s largest derivative exchanges, has already started transactions. Singapore is planning to start trading CCP-aligned contracts before world leaders gather in Scotland for climate talks in November, Adams said.
The trading will be facilitated by Climate Impact X, a new platform backed by Singapore’s state investment firm, stock exchange and largest bank. The Singapore trades will likely be based on rough guidelines that have been set out by the taskforce so far. It is not clear whether those contracts could be later amended to fit with the CCPs once they are final. Climate Impact X declined to comment.
“They’re basically saying they promise to procure and deliver CCP-certified credits to their counterparties in the future,” said Derik Broekhoff, a taskforce member and senior scientist at the Stockholm Environment Institute.
Buyers will probably pay more than they would purchasing credits directly from brokers or project developers, in exchange for the guarantee that they’re buying high-quality offsets endorsed by the taskforce.
“The sellers will then be on the hook to obtain and deliver the credits,” he said.
High-quality offsets that actually remove additional carbon from the atmosphere are extremely rare. Credits based on avoiding emissions made up 96 percent of all contracts issued last year, data compiled by the taskforce show, mostly by seeking to prevent trees from being cut down or supporting renewable energy projects. Climate scientists are cautious of using such credits to erase a company’s ongoing pollution because it is difficult to determine how much carbon, if any, has really been saved.
CME launched trading for carbon offset futures earlier this year, accepting Corsia-eligible offsets issued by Verified Carbon Standard, American Carbon Registry and Climate Action Reserve. The first trade took place in March and included independent oil traders Vitol and Mercuria. The bourse also plans to start nature-based offset contracts on Aug. 1.
CONCERNS AND SUSPICIONS
While CME is a member of the taskforce, it stopped short of saying it would adopt the CCP principles when they are issued.
“We are not climate change experts,” it said in a statement. “We are driven by customer demand and we will continue to be guided by our customers’ preferences and feedback.”
The decision by exchanges to move ahead with trading before the CCP label is finalized has reignited concerns from some taskforce members that the organizers of the group are willing to sacrifice quality for quantity. Carney has said the market could be valued at US$100 billion by 2030, up from about US$300 million in 2018, with demand growing rapidly as scores of companies and countries set net-zero targets.
“The taskforce isn’t really moving the needle on quality,” said Owen Hewlett, a member of the taskforce and chief technology officer at offsets registry Gold Standard. The focus is on building a large, efficient market to meet demand, he said, rather than working out the thorny issues of how companies should use offsets. “This is why there’s so much suspicion.”
The taskforce is also constrained by its lack of authority. Offsets trading is voluntary and project developers are reliant on companies being willing to fund their programs. For some, it is a question of getting trading to take off as quickly as possible, so more funds can flow to boost environmental protection while slowly moving toward better standards — and eventually even government regulation.
“Let’s recognize and applaud those who are doing something, of course, and encourage them to do more,” said Isabel Hagbrink, director of communications at project developer South Pole, which sits on the taskforce. “But understanding that, ultimately, governments have to step in and step up and say, ‘Look, this is not enough. This can’t be all voluntary climate action.’”
The first Donald Trump term was a boon for Taiwan. The administration regularized the arms sales process and enhanced bilateral ties. Taipei will not be so fortunate the second time around. Given recent events, Taiwan must proceed with the assumption that it cannot count on the United States to defend it — diplomatically or militarily — during the next four years. Early indications suggested otherwise. The nomination of Marco Rubio as US Secretary of State and the appointment of Mike Waltz as the national security advisor, both of whom have expressed full-throated support for Taiwan in the past, raised hopes that
There is nothing the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) could do to stop the tsunami-like mass recall campaign. KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) reportedly said the party does not exclude the option of conditionally proposing a no-confidence vote against the premier, which the party later denied. Did an “actuary” like Chu finally come around to thinking it should get tough with the ruling party? The KMT says the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is leading a minority government with only a 40 percent share of the vote. It has said that the DPP is out of touch with the electorate, has proposed a bloated
Authorities last week revoked the residency permit of a Chinese social media influencer surnamed Liu (劉), better known by her online channel name Yaya in Taiwan (亞亞在台灣), who has more than 440,000 followers online and is living in Taiwan with a marriage-based residency permit, for her “reunification by force” comments. She was asked to leave the country in 10 days. The National Immigration Agency (NIA) on Tuesday last week announced the decision, citing the influencer’s several controversial public comments, including saying that “China does not need any other reason to reunify Taiwan with force” and “why is it [China] hesitant
A media report has suggested that Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) was considering initiating a vote of no confidence in Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) in a bid to “bring down the Cabinet.” The KMT has denied that this topic was ever discussed. Why might such a move have even be considered? It would have been absurd if it had seen the light of day — potentially leading to a mass loss of legislative seats for the KMT even without the recall petitions already under way. Today the second phase of the recall movement is to begin — which has
RSS