Crowdsourced Climate Implications of Carbon Offsets

Background

• Offsets can be purchased and applied to GHG reduction targets.
• Most municipalities want to advance their own GHG reduction targets because of the co-benefits associated with GHG reductions (cost savings, local economic development, air pollution reductions, etc.)
• There is likely to be a gap between GHG reductions achievable by municipalities and net zero targets. Offsets present an opportunity to address that gap.
• There are differences across offsets regarding the credibility of GHG reductions
• Carbon offsets sharing: https://guides.co/g/corporate-energy-managers-community-of-practice/203887
• There is the opportunity to bring offsets costs into municipal GHG reduction business cases.

Carbon Offsets vs. Carbon Credits

• Carbon offset: The purchase of some other entities’ GHG reductions towards your GHG reduction targets
• Carbon credit: The sale of GHG reductions from (in this case, a municipality) to another entity to help them achieve their GHG reductions.
• Once a carbon credit is sold, it can no longer be applied toward the seller’s GHG reduction targets.
• Therefore, if a municipality sells any GHG reductions, they cannot use those reductions towards their targets.

Crowdsourced Climate Implications (Risks/Opportunities)

Climate Risks

• Is there a limit of how much offset a municipality can buy?
• Buying offsets may lead to less efforts made towards local climate actions
• Would it be needed to have a carbon budget in order to sell carbon credits?

Preliminary Climate Implications

Decision High-Level Questions:

• Is this decision the only option available to meet the need/hoped-for outcome?
  • A municipality can achieve its GHG reduction targets.
• What other issues are we trying to solve?
  • Greenhouse gas emissions reductions, air pollution, increased frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, flooding, urban heat islands, etc.
• What consequences could arise from this?
  • Municipalities have to purchase these offsets every year – not a long-term solution. However, carbon offsets may be able to address the gap for the most difficult reductions to achieve.
• Does the work align with [municipal] policies related to [the] environment and climate?
  • Yes, it aligns with Climate Change Action Plans, the federal government’s GHG reduction targets, the Province’s reduction targets, and municipal GHG reduction targets

Mitigation High-Level Questions:

• How does it support/undermine the Climate Action Mitigation Plan?
  • Carbon Offsets would support the Climate Action Mitigation Plan by providing a tool to meet its GHG reduction targets and mitigate climate change
• Have health co-benefits been identified or calculated? (The opportunity to share where mitigation is considered, i.e., the positives.)
  • The health co-benefits would include all benefits that result from GHG reduction, including better air quality, less vulnerability to climate-related extreme weather events, and increased resilience to climate change-related climate events.
  • For air pollution, where the reductions occur will be important for public health benefits, while where the overall GHG reductions occur is less of a factor.
• What potential consequences could arise from this action? Are we doing more for less?
  • Relying on others GHG reductions missing out on the benefits of GHG reductions (energy and cost savings for example).
• Does not implementing the adaptation option increase public health risk?
  • It could, if it means that municipalities are not able to meet their GHG reduction targets and so air pollution and extreme weather events become more frequent
• Does this address a legislative/regulatory responsibility?
  • No, because no governments have required municipalities to use carbon offsets.

Adaptation High-Level Questions:

• How does it support/undermine the Climate Action Adaptation Plan?
  • Carbon Offsets are more of a mitigation tool