It was the dawn of carbon-off-setting, emitting one place and then reducing or removing emissions elsewhere and calling that climate neutral.

Following the Kyoto Protocol negotiations in 1996/97, industrialized countries, including the U.S., picked up on the idea of carbon crediting and carbon off-setting and explored flexible market mechanisms that, according to Libby Blanchard, would potentially make it more economically feasible for industrialized countries to meet the goals and carbon-reduction metrics of the 2015 United Nations-brokered Paris Agreement.

Three and half decades after that first experiment in Guatemala with carbon off-sets the idea seems to have hit an inflection point. “A carbon credit becomes an offset when it’s used to trade against emissions somewhere else,” reiterates Blanchard, a postdoctoral research associate at the Wilkes Center for Climate Science & Policy and the School of Biological Sciences here at the University of Utah. “And a carbon credit is supposed to be one ton of carbon dioxide equivalent reduced or removed from the atmosphere over a predetermined period of time. The big problem with carbon credits is a large majority are not real or are what we call over-credited, or both, meaning that they’re not representing or are over-representing the amount of carbon dioxide equivalent actually reduced or removed for the atmosphere.”

In this episode of the Talking Climate podcast, produced by the Wilkes Center for Climate Sciences & Policy, Ross Chambless, Wilkes Center community engagement manager, interviews Blanchard on a new “Contribution Approach” replacement of the struggling carbon offsets market.

Listen to the full podcast and view the transcript.