The Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative (VCMI) has published its guide for companies wanting to use carbon credits as part of their overall climate strategy.
Companies should publish their annual emissions and progress towards science-based carbon targets before making any claim of positive environmental action, according to the the VCMI Claims Code of Practice.
Carbon offset’s shaky public record in recent years – including the revelation in January that more than 90% of offsetting giant Verra’s rainforest credits had been worthless – prompted the VCMI to make the shift to a “contribution” model, where each credit acts as a generic contribution to the climate, rather than claiming to cancel out prior or future emissions.
Razan Al Mubarak, the UN’s climate change high-level champion for COP28, said: “We are woefully off-track from where we need to be and we need to use all the tools in the box, working at full pace.
“The voluntary carbon market is one tool that can mobilise the much-needed finance to low and middle-income countries towards climate solutions that will accelerate the net-zero transition. It’s not too late to drive progress, and the VCMI Claims Code released today is a welcome step forward.”
Many printers, however, already use carbon credits, or ‘offsetting’, to make claims of carbon neutrality, something which the VCMI said may put them in future danger from a rapidly expanding regulatory system.
The UK competition and markets authority (CMA) has launched multiple high profile investigations into companies’ claims of being eco-friendly, with the fast fashion sector first to come under scrutiny in 2022, with Asos, Boohoo and George at Asda investigated, and the CMA confirming in early 2023 it would expand its remit to FMCG brands.
Nathan Tiller, co-founder of Carbon Quota, a print-sector carbon calculation and reduction agency, told Printweek that carbon offsetting’s increasing association with greenwashing – false or misrepresentative environmental claims – had harmed its image.
He said: “Look at Unilever – they have just pulled out of it completely.”
He added that there would always be a place for businesses to donate profits to tree-planting or forest preservation schemes, but it would be wrong to claim it “cancels out” their carbon emissions.
He added: “The evidence is that carbon credits are very hard to validate, so making a claim that you are now carbon neutral [from offsetting] is pretty much discredited by science and the media.”
Paul Hewitt, managing director of Generation Press, Environmental Company of the Year 2023 at the Printweek Awards, was lukewarm about the term.
Speaking to Printweek, he said that while not the “be all end all,” the process of accurately measuring carbon emissions – independently audited when being certified as carbon neutral – was a required step for any meaningful climate action.
He said: “Without that measuring stick, you can’t be sure you’re making progress.
“Especially in terms of achieving qualifications like EMAS and ISO, it’s nice to say you’re carbon neutral or carbon positive, but being able to measurably improve is the most important part.”
Zoë Hazelden, Generation Press’ environmental lead, added: “Carbon neutral is the first step. The main thing is to collect data.
“That then creates signposts to what you can do to make savings and sustainable choices that improve your business and the planet. Without this audited data, you would be making blind decisions.”
Offsets themselves, she said, are a “tiny proportion” of the overall environmental system.
“The companies certifying or calculating carbon neutrality get the most money.
“The offsets are tiny, mostly abroad, helping small projects. How much money reaches them will be hard to find out.”
Generation Press instead sponsors UK tree planting and preservation projects in the UK as its positive contribution to the climate, alongside its strict carbon and waste reduction policies.
The easiest win for printers looking to cut emissions quickly, she said, was to switch to 100% renewable electricity, which should then be certified by the electric company.
Greg Selfe, founder of carbon reduction consultancy Nero Carbon, agreed that carbon credits deserve a place in the overall sustainability ecosystem – but not before “deep level cuts” to emissions.
He told Printweek that in following with the widely respected Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi), he advises clients to invest in climate mitigation action beyond their value chains.
He said: “Nero follows the SBTi guidance and recommends to its clients that use high quality carbon offsetting to promote the carbon mitigation benefits of the activity, while ensuring [consumer] confidence that these activities are in conjunction with rapid and deep reductions in the company’s emissions.
“If a company decides to offset its emissions, they should immediately start planning their reduction targets.”
Jonathan Tame, managing director of print and paper sustainability advocate Two Sides, agreed that printers should stick first and foremost to reduction according to the SBTi.
He told Printweek: "Any new recommendations are welcome.
"The key is measurement, reporting to science-based targets, and then reduction.
"After that, I think offsetting can play an important part, but organisations should be very careful about their sources. If they want to mitigate their impact, they should be using high quality offsetting."
