This article is the third installment of [Addressing the Top 4 Criticisms of Carbon Neutrality]

Criticism #1: The ability to purchase carbon offsets can delay real action

Criticism #2: Lack of accountability and transparency

Criticism #3: Lack of Additionality

Additionality is vital for the credibility of carbon offset projects, ensuring genuine carbon reductions that wouldn't occur anyway without financial support or in the regular course of business. Critics argue that without proper verification, some carbon offsets may support financially viable projects instead of real emission reductions.

Ariva's carbon offset partner, Carbonzero, employs a rigorous project development process to assess additionality to ensure that their portfolio of supported projects is truly additional and wouldn't have occurred otherwise. This includes:

•    Baseline Scenario Assessment: Determining what would have happened without the carbon offset project, including analysis of practices, regulations, and financial considerations.
•    Additionality Testing: Tests to ensure the project isn't a business-as-usual scenario, including regulatory, financial, and barrier tests.
•    Emissions Reduction Calculation: Calculating reductions using standards like the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS), ISO-14064-2 (CSA CleanProjects) and the Gold Standard.
•    Third-Party Verification: Independent verification to ensure accurate assessment and reporting.

Ariva is committed to ensuring our customers’ carbon offsets are additional, transparent, verifiable, and aligned with industry best practices. This commitment strengthens the integrity of the program and provides confidence that support is making a real difference in the fight against climate change.

Stay tuned for the continuation of this article which will include: permanence.