Let’s de‑romanticise this.
Reality: What a carbon credit is
Most serious definitions agree: a carbon credit is a tradeable instrument that conveys a claim to one tonne of avoided or removed greenhouse gas emissions, issued under a recognised carbon‑crediting program after verification.
It exists in a registry, has a unique ID, can change hands, and can eventually be retired by a buyer.
Myth 1: “One credit makes us carbon neutral.”
A single credit compensates for one tonne of emissions on paper. Whether that actually balances the climate books depends on:
- Additionality (would the project have happened anyway?)
- Permanence (does the carbon stay out of the atmosphere?)
- Leakage (did emissions just move somewhere else?)
Without integrity, you’re just buying decorative numbers.
Myth 2: “All credits are basically the same.”
Credits differ wildly by:
- Project type (renewables vs forest conservation vs removals)
- Methodology and standard (Verra, Gold Standard, CDM, etc.)
- Vintage and risk profile (reversal risk, political risk, over‑crediting)
Treating them as interchangeable is like treating all “assets” as equally good, from U.S. Treasuries to dog‑themed altcoins.
Myth 3: “Credits replace the need to cut emissions”
No. Every credible framework says the same thing: first reduce your own emissions as much as possible, then use credits for the hard‑to‑abate remainder.
If credits are Plan A, you don’t have a climate strategy; you have a PR strategy.
Done right, credits are a tool for financing real mitigation and dealing with residual emissions. Done badly, they’re just a more expensive way to lie to yourself.