Global Scientists Demand ‘Real Zero’ as Corporate Carbon Offsets Fall Short of Climate Goals

A group of over 60 climate scientists from countries including the UK, US, and Australia has condemned corporate reliance on carbon offsets, calling them “ineffectual” and a hindrance to meaningful climate action. Their joint statement, known as the “real zero pledge,” advocates for direct emissions reductions, known as “real zero,” as the only viable path to prevent escalating climate impacts.

Organized by the Lethal Humidity Global Council, this pledge highlights the growing scientific consensus that corporate carbon offset practices, which often involve credits for forest conservation or land management, fail to deliver genuine emissions cuts. Key scientists such as Professor Michael Mann and Bill Hare emphasize that offsets provide a misleading impression of progress and divert focus from cutting fossil fuel use.

The Lethal Humidity Global Council, which coordinated this pledge, comprises scientists, health experts, and policymakers concerned with climate threats, especially those linked to rising humidity and extreme heat.

Scientists argue that forest-based carbon offsets, commonly used by corporations, are unreliable as they depend on trees that may eventually release carbon back into the atmosphere due to environmental factors like wildfires or droughts.

Professor Katrin Meissner from the University of New South Wales noted that offset programs based on temporary carbon storage provide a false sense of security, as these natural systems are vulnerable to environmental disturbances that negate their initial carbon-sequestering effects.

Signatories warn that corporate over-reliance on offsets delays essential emissions cuts, which are critical to meet the targets of the Paris Agreement. They emphasize that with time running out to keep global warming within safe limits, it’s vital to halt high-carbon activities directly rather than depend on offsetting schemes.

Meissner stressed that without an immediate and substantial reduction in fossil fuel use, the goal of maintaining temperature rise within the Paris Agreement’s limits is unlikely to be achieved. This urgency contrasts sharply with the current use of offsets as a way to sustain ongoing emissions-intensive practices.

Professor Sarah Perkins-Kirkpatrick, another signatory from the Australian National University, argued that net-zero strategies reliant on offsets represent a temporary “Band-Aid solution” rather than addressing the root cause of emissions.

She and others suggest that net-zero goals can create an illusion of progress while postponing essential changes to industrial and energy systems. Additionally, the heavy reliance on natural carbon sinks, such as forests and oceans, is increasingly unsustainable, as these ecosystems are already under stress and may fail to keep pace with current emission levels, according to Australian ocean ambassador Russell Reichelt.

The council organizing the pledge is supported by the Minderoo Foundation, co-founded by Australian billionaire Andrew Forrest, who has criticized net zero as a “fantasy” and urged companies to eliminate fossil fuel dependency entirely.

Forrest’s foundation highlights the need for corporations to transition away from fossil fuels rather than lean on offset credits. The scientists’ stance aligns with this view, underscoring that only real and immediate cuts in fossil fuel use can address the climate crisis effectively, while offsets often serve as a convenient but ineffective alternative that delays true progress.