Should We Leave Saving the Planet to the Accountants?

Professor Simon Lewis (University College of London and Leeds University) has written a timely opinion piece warning of some dangers associated with so-called 'carbon credits' (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/03/climate-crisis-carbon-accounting-tricks-big-finance). Most people now appear to accept that human-mediated additions to atmospheric carbon dioxide drive global heating. Lewis notes that even the governments of many countries claim to agree, in spite of their short-term actions not always following. Governments state they have been convinced that we must move to 'net zero' release of carbon dioxide, by 'mid Century', to prevent 'runaway' climate change. As Lewis points out, the science of 'net zero' is simple. It can only be achieved if every sector of every country is, on average, a zero emitter of carbon dioxide. We know how to do this for many sectors (like the operation of cars, heating of homes and generation of electricity). There are, however, other areas (such as air travel and some agricultural operations), where 'there is no prospect of zero emissions in the near future'. The existence of this second category, means 'net zero' can only be achieved, by sucking 'greenhouse gases' out of the atmosphere at the same rate. Lewis specifies that low-tech (like planting trees) and hi-tech (like removing and storing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere) methods of generating 'negative emissions' (as carbon removal is sometimes called) exist. He notes, however, there is not enough land for the required number of trees and large scale versions of the hi-tech solution don't currently exist. This is where the accountants, with their offsetting schemes, come in. Lewis is dubious about them. He notes that you can't really claim to be 'carbon neutral' (even if you are the $600bn Brookfield Asset Management) by 'counter-balancing' the oil and gas in your portfolio, with investment in renewables. The future emissions savings by the renewables, does not balance the carbon dioxide release associated with the non-renewables. What is important, is the amount of carbon dioxide released. Lewis also suggests that many of the currently-traded carbon credits are either entirely notional or even historical artefacts. He seems concerned that these accountancy 'tricks' are simply designed, to let business go on 'more or less as usual'. I fear he may be right. I also fear that governments will be attracted to them.