Carbon neutrality refers to achieving net zero carbon emissions by balancing the carbon released to the amount sequestered or offset. It includes transportation, energy production and industrial processes. Carbon neutrality can be achieved by individuals, companies, organizations, cities, regions, or countries. Large organisations like Tesco, PepsiCo, Dell, Google, PUMA, World Bank etc. have pledged to go carbon neutral. Countries like Costa Rica, Iceland, Maldives, New Zealand, Norway, Tuvalu and also Vatican City have made similar pledges.

Like most new ideas this one is also not without its detractors. Often critiqued as a way to purge your climate sins, it is likened to the Catholic Church’s sale of indulgences before the Reformation¹," said Denis Hayes, the president of the Bullitt Foundation, an environmental grant-making group. "Instead of reducing their carbon footprints, people take private jets and stretch limos, and then think they can buy an indulgence to forgive their sins." The lack of scrutiny and accountability leads to the suspicion that it’s all just hot air. The biggest drawback is the emphasis on offsetting using market mechanisms like carbon credits. Instead of encouraging behavioural change in consumption patterns as well as social, economic and political structures, the idea that paying a little extra for certain goods and services is sufficient; is being perpetrated. So if you are willing to pay a bit more for things, you don’t have to worry about how much is consumed, because the price already includes offsetting the emissions it produces.

However in order to deal with climate change it is important to move towards a low carbon economy, a way of life that is less carbon intensive and it may involve a fundamental change in life as we know it. The concept of carbon neutrality can be applied to move towards this goal. The most critical step in achieving carbon neutrality is accounting for the emissions that are to be eliminated. This involves delving into details of operations, activities, sources and responsibility. Once a baseline has been established steps should be taken to reduce these emissions. One of the strongest arguments for reducing emissions is that it is cost effective. This is especially true for energy with the increasing costs of oil. So it is both common sense and sensible for the climate to use energy as sparingly as possible. This can be achieved by targeting transport and electricity, the largest contributors to emissions by walking, using bicycles or public transport, avoiding flying, using low-energy vehicles, using renewable or low carbon sources of energy in buildings, equipment, animals and processes.

There have been steps taken in this direction. Samsø Island, Denmark, the largest carbon-neutral settlement with a population of 4200, is based on wind-generated electricity and biomass-based district heating. Extra wind power is exported to compensate for petro-fueled vehicles. There are future hopes of using electric or biofuel vehicles. Similarly over 99% of Iceland’s electricity production and almost 80% of total energy production comes from hydropower and geothermal. These showcase how behaviour is influenced to bring about a change in the way we perceive resources.

A similar initiative, Community Led Assessment, Awareness, Advocacy and Action Programme for Environment Protection and Carbon Neutrality in Himachal Pradesh (HP-CLAP) has been taken up by the Government of Himachal Pradesh. The programme aims at mobilising communities and building their capacity to assess their footprints and then take action to reduce it at source. Development Alternatives is co-ordinating and managing this program.

A participatory approach has been adopted with a view to influence behavioural change in the direction of low carbon growth and economies. The programme creates awareness about the degrading environment and the steps individuals and communities can take to stop it. The assessment will help them plan and take actions to reduce their impact. While this encourages a bottom up wave of change, advocacy at the state and district levels will ensure policy support to ease the path top-down also. This approach ensures that the programme does not only hanker after numbers but will bring about a perceptible change in the lifestyles and thinking of the community.

Any individual, organisation or government embracing this holistic attitude should commit to doing everything possible to reduce their climate impact, in place of simply offsetting responsibility for their emissions. The need of the hour is climate policies that reduce emissions at source with stricter regulation and penalties for polluters on community, local, national and international levels. Real solutions to climate change require social change and it’s about time we join that movement, spending time and energy (non-fossil fuel based) towards achieving such change. q

(Footnotes)
¹Denis Hayes, president , Bullitt Foundation, an environmental grant-making group

Back to Contents