Carbon offsetting has had a rough few years in the spotlight.
You’ve probably seen the headlines: “Most offsets don’t work”, “Phantom credits”, “Greenwashing exposed”. If you’ve already taken steps into carbon offsetting, it’s fair to wonder whether it’s all been a waste of time and money.
The short answer…carbon offsetting can work – but not automatically. Like most climate tools, its impact depends entirely on how it’s done.
Let’s unpack what’s gone wrong, what genuinely works, and how organisations and individuals alike can move forward with confidence rather than cynicism.
Why Carbon Offsetting Gets So Much Criticism
A lot of the criticism aimed at carbon offsetting is justified.
Investigations into large-scale forest protection projects revealed that many credits were issued for emissions reductions that likely would have happened anyway. In some cases, deforestation risk was overstated, meaning the “saved” carbon wasn’t really under threat in the first place.
This has created two big problems:
- False confidence – People and organisations believe they’ve neutralised emissions when, in reality, atmospheric CO₂ hasn’t changed.
- Reputational risk – Offsetting becomes associated with greenwashing rather than genuine climate action.
From that perspective, scepticism is healthy. Blindly buying cheap credits to tick a box doesn’t help the climate–and can actively slow progress by delaying real emissions reductions.
But here’s the key point: these failures don’t mean all carbon offsetting is broken.
Why the “Offsets Never Work” Argument Misses the Mark
Writing off all carbon offsetting because some projects failed is a bit like abandoning recycling because some waste ends up in landfill.
The climate challenge is simply too big for a single solution.
According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, even with aggressive emissions reductions, the world will still need to remove billions of tonnes of CO₂ from the atmosphere every year by mid-century. Some emissions–especially in sectors like aviation, agriculture, and heavy industry–are incredibly difficult to eliminate entirely.
That’s where high-quality carbon offsetting still plays a role:
- Funding climate solutions that wouldn’t happen otherwise
- Accelerating new carbon removal technologies
- Channelling money into nature and communities that need long-term protection
- Offsetting isn’t a replacement for reducing emissions—but it can complement it when done properly.
What Actually Makes a Carbon Offset “Work”?
The effectiveness of an offset comes down to a few core principles. You don’t need to be a climate scientist to grasp them, but you do need to know what questions to ask.
1. Additionality: Would This Happen Without the Funding?
This is the most important concept.
If a project would have gone ahead anyway–because it’s already profitable, legally required, or standard practice–then the offset isn’t creating new climate benefit.
High-quality projects usually show:
- Clear financial barriers without carbon funding
- Activities that go beyond business-as-usual
- Evidence that carbon finance tipped the project from “unlikely” to “possible”
- Emerging technologies and projects in underfunded regions tend to score better here than well-established solutions in mature markets.
2. Permanence: Will the Carbon Stay Out of the Atmosphere?
Not all carbon storage is equal.
Permanent removal (like capturing CO₂ and storing it underground) keeps carbon locked away for centuries or longer.
Nature-based storage (like forests) is valuable but vulnerable to fire, disease, or land-use change.
Avoided emissions (such as renewable energy) prevent future emissions but don’t remove existing CO₂.
None of these are “bad” by default, but permanence risks need to be acknowledged and managed. Strong projects use buffer reserves, insurance mechanisms, or conservative accounting to deal with reversals when they happen.
3. Leakage: Are Emissions Just Moving Elsewhere?
A project that stops emissions in one place but pushes them into another hasn’t really solved the problem.
Credible projects account for this by:
- Working at a regional or landscape scale
- Engaging local communities so livelihoods aren’t displaced
- Discounting claimed reductions to reflect realistic leakage risks
If a provider can’t clearly explain how leakage is addressed, that’s a warning sign.
4. Independent Verification: Trust, But Verify
Effective offset projects are independently audited and verified against recognised standards.
Frameworks like Gold Standard and programmes linked to the United Nations exist to separate measurable impact from good intentions. Verification doesn’t make a project perfect–but it significantly reduces the risk of inflated claims.
Transparency matters just as much as certification. If project details, audit reports, or methodologies aren’t accessible, it’s worth questioning why.
So… Does Carbon Offsetting Actually Work?
Yes–but only when it’s treated as a climate tool, not a shortcut to a clean conscience.
A credible approach usually looks like this:
- Reduce emissions first wherever possible
- Be honest about residual emissions that can’t yet be eliminated
- Invest in verified, additional projects with clear climate impact
- Stay curious and critical, rather than chasing the cheapest tonne
When offsetting is done this way, it stops being about bold claims and starts being about real-world climate progress.
