JOURNAL ARTICLE

Auditors can't save carbon offsets.

  • Published In: Science, 2025, v. 389, n. 6756. P. 107 1 of 3

  • Database: Academic Search Ultimate 2 of 3

  • Authored By: Giles, Cynthia; Coglianese, Cary 3 of 3

Abstract

The theory behind carbon offset projects is appealing: Instead of an organization cutting its own emissions, it can fund lower-cost carbon-reducing projects elsewhere to "offset" its emissions. The reality has been less encouraging. Most carbon offset projects that have been closely scrutinized—including projects for forest protection, renewable energy, and methane-reducing methods of rice cultivation—have greatly exaggerated their climate benefits. More than 80% of issued credits might not reflect real emission reductions. This has alarmed potential offset purchasers and stalled carbon offset markets. Efforts to resuscitate the beleaguered offset market tout third-party auditing as "essential" to ensuring credit integrity. That reliance is misplaced. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Additional Information

  • Source:Science. 2025/07, Vol. 389, Issue 6756, p107
  • Document Type:Editorial
  • Subject Area:Environmental Sciences
  • Publication Date:2025
  • ISSN:0036-8075
  • DOI:10.1126/science.ady4864
  • Accession Number:188103931
  • Copyright Statement:Copyright of Science is the property of American Association for the Advancement of Science and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Looking to go deeper into this topic? Look for more articles on EBSCOhost.