Response to SBTi Call for evidence on the effectiveness of Environmental Attribute Certificates in climate targets

The submission argues that environmental attribute certificates, specifically REDD+ carbon credits and energy certificates like RECs and GOs, are unsuitable for corporate decarbonisation targets. It highlights systemic issues in the voluntary carbon market, including over-crediting and flawed methodologies in REDD+ projects, and asserts that energy certificates are financial instruments that do not represent physical electricity delivery. The document advocates for a strict separation of these certificates from gross emission reduction targets, citing the EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) as a regulatory precedent.

• REDD+ carbon crediting programs in the voluntary carbon market are deemed ill-suited for generating emission reduction factors due to systemic over-crediting, flawed methodologies, and a 'race to the bottom' where buyers seek the cheapest, most over-credited credits.
• The methodologies used to quantify emissions reductions in REDD+ projects often exaggerate actual climate impacts and fail to address primary deforestation drivers like large-scale agriculture, logging, and mining.
• Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) and Guarantees of Origin (GOs) are characterized as financial instruments that do not represent the physical delivery of electrical energy and have been shown not to cause actual emission reductions.
• The EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) provides a regulatory model by requiring that GHG emission reduction targets be gross targets, explicitly prohibiting the use of carbon credits, GHG removals, or avoided emissions to achieve these targets.
• Using REDD+ credits to offset fossil fuel emissions is criticized as it transfers carbon from permanent geological storage to a short-duration carbon cycle, increasing the risk of atmospheric release.

APA

Carbon Market Watch (n.d.). Response to SBTi Call for evidence on the effectiveness of Environmental Attribute Certificates in climate targets. https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/SUMMARY-submission-to-the-SBTi-Call-for-evidence.pdf

Chicago

Carbon Market Watch. Response to SBTi Call for evidence on the effectiveness of Environmental Attribute Certificates in climate targets. n.d. https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/SUMMARY-submission-to-the-SBTi-Call-for-evidence.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |author=Carbon Market Watch |title=Response to SBTi Call for evidence on the effectiveness of Environmental Attribute Certificates in climate targets |url=https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/SUMMARY-submission-to-the-SBTi-Call-for-evidence.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{carbonmarketwatchndresponse, author = {{Carbon Market Watch}}, title = {{Response to SBTi Call for evidence on the effectiveness of Environmental Attribute Certificates in climate targets}}, publisher = {Carbon Market Watch}, url = {https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/SUMMARY-submission-to-the-SBTi-Call-for-evidence.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }