The idea of carbon neutral seems a good idea, but the way it is being bought and sold as an option to then pollute as you want does not seem
to be the best option for cleaning up our plant
The best way to truly reach carbon neutrality is by never releasing carbon into the atmosphere
85% of our global energy consumption still comes from toxic fossil fuels
Between 1990 and 2016, the world lost 502,000 square miles of trees - an area larger than South Africa
We should replace a least a big percentage of the ones we have cut down before we can start counting any as an ‘offset’.
With both deforestation & harmful emissions, we need to come at this from both sides, replacing trees and reducing our emissions
We must change our energy production at the source, this will save money, time and lives
Carbon offsetting may be a good start in getting money pushed in to clean energy sources, however it is not an option that can be allowed to go on for
years as this gives companies a green light to continue produce harmful emissions if they are making enough money
Indepth Study
Carbon Neutrality
Carbon neutrality, or having a net zero carbon footprint, refers to achieving net zero carbon dioxide emissions by balancing carbon emissions with
carbon removal. There are two ways to achieve carbon neutrality:
1. Reducing Carbon Emissions
The best way to truly reach carbon neutrality is by never releasing carbon into the atmosphere in the first place. This means reducing carbon
through changing energy sources and industry processes. Shifting our energy economy from fossil fuels to clean energy (wind and solar) is by far the
best way to ensure a reduction in carbon emissions.
Many people also advocate for carbon offsetting as a way to reach carbon neutrality. Carbon Offsetting, in a nutshell, is the process of removing or
sequestering carbon dioxide from the atmosphere to make up for emissions elsewhere.
Issues with Carbon Offsetting
Carbon Offsetting is a way of paying for others to reduce emissions or absorb CO2 to compensate for your own emissions. For example, one might try to
offset their carbon emissions by paying for people to plant trees or to deliver energy-efficient cooking stoves to communities in developing countries.
In fact, fossil fuel companies love talking about the idea of carbon offsetting as a way to fight climate change. However, while it may seem like a good
idea in theory, it is simply a way for these big corporations to pass the responsibility on to consumers while ignoring the real problem: 85% of our
global energy consumption still comes from toxic fossil fuels see the current situation section
Planting Trees
Tree planting is frequently lauded by companies such as Shell and BP as the answer to the climate emergency. However, a newly-planted tree can take as
many as 20 years to capture the amount of CO2 that a carbon-offset scheme promises. Furthermore, trees do not last forever. If a tree dies through fire,
disease, climatic changes, natural decay or timber harvesting, all of the CO2 stored in that tree will once again be released into the atmosphere.
We have already cut down millions of trees aroudn eth worlk
Deforestation
Over the past 50 years 17% of the Amazonian rainforest has been destroyed. Forests still cover about 30 percent of the world’s land area, but they are
disappearing at an alarming rate. Between 1990 and 2016, the world lost 502,000 square miles (1.3 million square kilometres) of forest, according to the
World Bank—an area larger than South Africa
So planting trees is a good idea, but maybe we should replace a least a big percentage of the ones we have cut down before we start counting any as an
‘offset’.
With a combination of our deforestation and harmful emissions, we need to come at this problem from both sides, replacing the tress and
reducing our emissions by a big percentage.
Pollution
Allowing energy companies and industries to still emit harmful emissions also means that air pollution will not reduce causing health problems for millions
and a continued yearly death toll of tens of thousands across the world.
Releasing unnecessary greenhouse gases and pollutants in to the air then attempting to clean them up later does not seem a logical way to keep our
planet clean, especially when there are energy sources that are completely clean that do not emit any harmful gases in to the atmosphere. We must change
our energy production at the source, this will save money, time and lives.
+34 910 180 818 
+44 20 3514 1012 
