By: Katie Koenig
Officially, I’m the Research Sustainability Fellow at Emerson College. Functionally, that means I spend a lot of time on my computer, figuring out the most efficient way to word google queries to find the exact internet pages and websites I need for my current projects. Not a lot of my work is visible for anyone beyond my work group, which is true of a decent portion of all of our work on campus. Sometimes, I come across interesting tidbits of information—like with many campuses’ carbon neutrality statements.
The context: I’m currently researching different universities’ strategies to achieve carbon neutrality on their campuses in order to provide guidance for Emerson to implement on our own campus.
The issue: Not everyone explicitly defines what ‘carbon neutrality’ really means, which makes the matter even more complicated when people start tossing around phrases like ‘carbon zero,’ ‘net zero,’ and ‘offsetted emissions’ as though their meanings exist in some hive mind of information that everyone has access to except for me. So, I thought to myself, Why not put an overview of the whole ‘carbon offset’ and neutrality issue all in one place?
First up; carbon neutrality. This is a hot topic, especially after COP 28 back in November, with plenty of universities in the U.S. working towards their neutrality goals. (Emerson has promised carbon neutrality by 2030, which is the reason I got into this research in the first place.) What it literally means is that an institution is producing net zero emissions in two categories, specifically in direct emissions (what Second Nature refers to as Scope 1 emissions) and indirect emissions from purchased energy (Scope 2 emissions). Carbon neutrality typically does not include Scope 3 emissions, which are the remaining indirect emissions attributed to an organization (for Emerson, this includes emissions sources like commuting to campus, faculty travel, and purchased goods).
If you think of it like a simple equation,
Emissions Produced – Offset Emissions = Net Emissions,
carbon zero refers to zero produced emissions, and net zero or carbon neutrality refers to net (or total) emissions.
Secondly; offsetting emissions. Declaring carbon neutrality doesn’t mean that the institution produces no emissions at all. It merely means that the institution offsets all Scope 1 and 2 emissions it does produce by investing in carbon offsetting projects. Essentially, an institution such as Emerson can invest in a project anywhere in the world that reduces emissions in that area more than normal day-to-day operations would, measured in CO2-equivalent tonnes. Because greenhouse gas emissions are global — it doesn’t matter where they come from in terms of their global warming potential for the whole planet — an emissions reduction project in one location can offset emissions in another. Hence, calling them ‘carbon’ offsets, even if the project reduces or is used to offset non-CO2 GHG emissions.
Third; carbon zero. Not to be confused with ‘net zero’ and ‘carbon neutrality,’ declaring carbon zero means that an institution actually produces no GHG emissions at all (again, measured in CO2-equivalent tonnes), regardless of any purchased offsets credits.
Finally, there’s a rare term I’ve only found used in a few instances; carbon positive. Just as it implies, it means that an institution actually sequesters more GHG emissions than it produces, so it actively reduces total emissions from around it.
In short, if you look up offset projects or carbon neutrality, understand that they refer to total emissions, subtracting offset emissions. Only when the phrase ‘carbon zero’ or similar phrases is used, does it refer to an institution that actually produces no Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions at all.