Opinion is divided on whether carbon offsetting can help tackle climate change. GILES BROWN asked whether carbon credits are really an effective way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Dr Steve Curl, Former Chair, Zero Carbon Cumbria’s oversight board, says: "

Businesses in Cumbria have an important role in reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

The recent Zero Carbon Cumbria emissions report shows that industry and businesses in Cumbria make a significant contribution to the county’s carbon footprint. First and foremost, all businesses should do their best to cut their own GHG emissions.

Despite best efforts, there will be businesses that have some irreducible emissions. The use of carbon credits to balance these provides funds to help other organisations reduce their emissions more quickly and more fully whilst offsetting a business’ own irreducible emissions.

Carbon credits should not be used as an excuse to slow down or avoid taking action to cut a business’ own emissions; this gives a false sense of accomplishment.

Carbon credit schemes should be selected with caution to support the permanent reduction of carbon emissions, like carbon capture and storage or a lasting reduction of fossil fuel use, rather than temporary reductions such as planting trees for commercial forestry.

Overall, properly regulated carbon credits can be a valuable tool in the broader strategy to mitigate climate change, complementing direct emission reduction efforts that will very often give a significant payback.

Michelle Waller, head of green finance, Cumbria Wildlife Trust, says: "

Whilst an important part of the jigsaw, in isolation carbon credits won’t reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

High-quality, credible, carbon credits that lock away carbon for the long-term are important in restoring and maintaining the habitats that do just this.

However, it is vital that we tread more lightly and have less negative impact rather than solely relying on offsets.

Society should be looking to prevent and reduce emissions, supported by removal of harmful gases.

If not, there is the risk of greenwashing and justifying ‘business as usual’ - where the purchase of offsets is taken as a replacement to make a genuine effort to reduce emissions.

We also shouldn’t overlook the importance of maintaining a healthy habitat so it doesn’t deteriorate and ‘leak’ carbon into our atmosphere.

If we don’t, the risk is they will deteriorate and simply add to the problem.

Dr Tom Higgs, consultant, Small World Consulting, says: "No. We need to focus first on reducing emissions and invest in ways to do that, and then invest in helping carbon removal and nature restoration as well.

The demand for claiming a product or company is net zero has soared, but being able to certify that a carbon offset scheme is effective, is permanent and wouldn’t have happened anyway, is incredibly difficult.

Additionally, there simply isn’t enough land available to offset all of our current emissions.

The huge challenge we face in reaching net zero globally means that we need to do both, drastically reduce emissions and increase carbon capture through restoring woodlands, peatlands and moving to regenerative farming practices.

That will also boost biodiversity, mitigate against the effects of climate change like floods and heatwaves, and with the right support, sustain rural communities.

Private finance could be an important part of helping that happen, but in addition to their own reduction plans, not instead of.