Technology-based carbon offsets capture atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO₂) or methane (CH₄) for the purpose of renewable energy generation or long-term storage. The pros and cons vary based on the specific type of technology used. So, we had to ask: What are the pros and cons of technology-based carbon offsets?

Technology-based carbon offsets generally remove emissions quickly and help transition away from fossil fuels; however, they also may not yet be scaled to compensate for our global emissions. Depending on the specific projects, they have varying levels of cost-effectiveness and additionality.

Keep reading to find out all about what the pros and cons of technology-based carbon offsets are, how you can offset your carbon footprint with them, how they can mitigate climate change, and what better alternatives to technology-based carbon offsets are. 

The Big Picture of Technology-Based Carbon Offsets

Carbon offsets are reductions in carbon emissions that are used to compensate for carbon emissions occurring elsewhere. They are measured in tons of CO₂ equivalents and are bought and sold through international brokers, online retailers, and trading platforms on what is known as the global carbon offset market.

“Carbon offset: a way for a company or person to reduce the level of carbon dioxide for which they are responsible by paying money to a company that works to reduce the total amount produced in the world, for example by planting trees”

Oxford Dictionary

Carbon removal is the process of eliminating carbon from the atmosphere. It is also referred to as negative emissions or carbon drawdown.

“Carbon Removal: the process of removing CO₂ from the atmosphere”

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

Carbon removal can be split into 2 categories, technological and natural carbon removal. 

• Technological removal: This involves specialized technology which extracts carbon from the atmosphere. 

• Natural removal: Also known as carbon sequestration. Carbon is stored naturally in vegetation (forests), soils, and oceans, also referred to as our carbon sinks. 

Technology-based carbon offsets are those that use specialized technology to extract carbon from the atmosphere so that it can then be repurposed or stored permanently in various reservoirs. 

Carbon offsets that are commonly classified as technology-based carbon offsets include:

• Direct Carbon/Air Capture
• Carbon Mineralization
• Energy Efficiency
• Waste Management 
• Agriculture

What Are 6 Pros of Technology-Based Carbon Offsets

Technology-based carbon offsets can cost-effectively reduce CO₂ and CH₄ emissions quickly while storing carbon for long periods of time. They also promote energy decentralization, bolster energy security, help transition away from fossil fuels, and allow us to reduce carbon emissions in ways we wouldn’t be able to accomplish individually.

Pro #1: Technology-Based Carbon Offsets Can Store Carbon For Long Periods of Time

Technology-based carbon offsets involving direct carbon/air capture (DCC/DAC), carbon mineralization, waste management, and agriculture can permanently remove carbon from the atmosphere with low rates of carbon re-emission.

Technology-Based Carbon Offset Pro #1

For example, Climeworks’ partner Carbfix turns captured CO₂ into stone by dissolving it in water and injecting it underground where it reacts with basalt rock to form solid minerals. This process locks away CO₂ for thousands of years with no long-term monitoring required.

In addition, because carbon mineralization is a permanent process, rates of carbon re-emission are very low. For example, greenSand Olivine rocks permanently store carbon and will only release that carbon back into the atmosphere if the temperature exceeds 1,600 degrees. In addition, even if the rocks are broken, the carbon will remain trapped inside. 

Lastly, waste management practices involving landfill gas capture, combustion, or conversion to energy and agricultural processes including CH₄ capture from livestock and the installation of anaerobic methane digesters for manure conversion and on-farm electricity generation also permanently remove emissions from the atmosphere.

When comparing the above methods to other methods of carbon removal, like planting trees, we find that they reduce CO₂ emissions more permanently. With nature-based solutions, there is always the risk of droughts, wildfires, tree diseases, and deforestation wiping out newly planted trees and negating permanence and any carbon reduction benefits. 

In short, DCC/DAC, carbon mineralization, waste management, and agricultural offsets can permanently remove CO₂ from the atmosphere. Storing the carbon underground in rock formations is also a permanent process. 

Pro #2: Technology-Based Carbon Offsets Can Reduce CO₂ Emissions Quickly

Technology-based carbon offsets involving direct carbon/air capture (DCC/DAC), carbon mineralization, energy efficiency, and some waste management and agricultural practices can reduce emissions immediately.

Technology-Based Carbon Offset Pro #2

Technology-based carbon offsets generally reduce CO₂ emissions quicker than natural processes:

• Once the DCC/DAC machines start sucking in atmospheric air, they begin reducing CO₂ emissions. 

• Carbon mineralization projects break down silicate rocks into tiny pieces, thereby skipping slow weathering processes. Carbfix can achieve 95% permanent carbon mineralization in under two years. 

• As soon as energy-efficient mechanisms are installed, switched on, or implemented, they begin reducing CO₂ emissions because they use less energy to perform the same task as traditional methods. 

• Waste management processes including landfill gas capture, combustion, or conversion to energy immediately reduce emissions.

• Lastly, CH₄ capture from agriculture livestock and the installation of anaerobic methane digesters for manure conversion and on-farm electricity generation reduces emissions once the technology is activated.

In short, technology-based carbon offsets can reduce emissions quicker than some nature-based solutions. 

Pro #3: Technology-Based Carbon Offsets Can Reduce Methane (CH₄) Emissions

Technology-based carbon offsets involving waste management and agriculture can reduce methane (CH₄) emissions.

Technology-Based Carbon Offset Pro #3

One of the most common waste management carbon offset projects involves landfill gas, specifically gas capture, combustion, or conversion to energy. CO₂ and CH₄ comprise 90-98% of landfill gasses, which are produced when bacteria break down organic waste (e.g., food, paper, wood, sewage sludge, and yard waste). CH₄ is 25 times more potent than CO₂ at trapping heat in our atmosphere, which exacerbates global warming. 

Waste management offsets involving CH₄ gas capture, combustion, or conversion-to-energy prevent CH₄ from entering our atmosphere. Because CH₄ is more potent than CO₂, removing it is a quick way to slow the rate of global warming, at least in the short term.

Agriculture is the predominant source of methane (CH₄) emissions, with livestock alone accounting for approximately 32% of human-caused CH₄ emissions. CH₄ is 25 times more potent than CO₂ at trapping heat in our atmosphere, which exacerbates global warming. 

CH₄ capture from livestock and the installation of anaerobic methane digesters for manure conversion and on-farm electricity generation are common agricultural offset projects. They prevent CH₄ from entering our atmosphere, and because CH₄ is more potent than CO₂, removing it is a quick way to slow the rate of global warming, at least in the short term.

In short, waste management and agricultural offsets can reduce CH₄ emissions via CH₄ capture, combustion, or conversion to energy projects.

Pro #4: Technology-Based Carbon Offsets Can Be Cost-Effective

Technology-based carbon offsets involving energy efficiency, waste management, and agriculture are some of the most cost-effective methods of carbon emission reduction.

Technology-Based Carbon Offset Pro #4

Coupling energy efficiency, waste management, and agricultural practices with carbon offsets could help finance the arduous task of reducing atmospheric CO₂ levels. Especially since these offsets are typically more cost-effective than other categories of offsets. 

• Energy-efficiency offsets from leading providers (e.g., Carbonfund, Ecologi, myclimate) cost less than $40 per ton of CO₂ offset.
• Waste management offsets from leading providers (e.g., GreenTech, Carbonfund, and Terrapass) cost less than $40 per ton of CO₂ offset.
• Agricultural offsets from leading providers (e.g., Vi Agroforestry, One Tree Planted, and Terrapass) cost less than $40 per ton of CO₂ offset.

In short, technology-based carbon offsets involving energy efficiency, waste management, and agriculture are relatively cost-effective when compared to other methods of carbon emission reduction.

Pro #5: Technology-Based Carbon Offsets Can Promote Energy Decentralization, Bolster Energy Security, And Help Transition Away From Fossil Fuels

Technology-based carbon offsets involving energy efficiency can help reduce reliance on fossil fuels, leading to increased energy security and energy independence.

Technology-Based Carbon Offset Pro #5

Overall, energy-efficient mechanisms use less energy than traditional mechanisms to perform the same task. This reduces overall energy demand, which in turn reduces reliance on imports of biomass fuels on fossil fuels (e.g., coal, oil, and natural gas). 

Being able to produce your own energy without relying on other entities increases energy security, which is reliable, affordable access to fuels and energy sources. And increased energy security fosters energy independence, which can aid in the transition away from fossil fuels and towards lower carbon options.

Energy-efficient practices also promote energy decentralization, where power is generated at or near locations where it will be used. This decreases the need to transport energy and generates environmental benefits associated with a lower carbon footprint. 

For example, clean cookstoves are a decentralized, energy-efficiency solution whereby cookstoves are distributed throughout communities. Rather than depending on power from a central location, individual families can utilize their own power in their homes.

In short, energy-efficiency offsets bolster energy security and can lead to energy independence.

Pro #6: Technology-Based Carbon Offsets Can Help Offset Carbon Emissions That Can’t Be Reduced Otherwise

Technology-based carbon offsets allow us to reduce carbon emissions in ways we wouldn’t be able to accomplish individually.

Technology-Based Carbon Offset Pro #6

We already have governmental-level policies in place to reduce carbon emissions, but carbon offsets allow us to reduce emissions from activities where sustainable alternatives are not yet widely available. 

Carbon offsets are designed for situations where emissions are impossible to reduce because you can use those funds to reduce emissions in other areas. For example, we can only do so much to reduce our individual carbon footprints. Using public transportation, washing with cold water, and switching from single-use to sustainable products lowers our carbon footprint, but it does not eliminate them completely. This is where technology-based carbon offsets come into play to compensate for the remainder of our carbon emissions.

In short, technology-based carbon offsets allow us to reduce carbon emissions in ways we wouldn’t be able to accomplish individually.

What Are 5 Cons of Technology-Based Carbon Offsets

Technology-based carbon offsets can lack additionality, are not yet scaled to compensate for our global emissions, can be expensive, and can be difficult to monitor and verify. They also do not reduce your own carbon emissions, which could lead to greenwashing.

Con #1: Technology-Based Carbon Offsets Can Lack Additionality

Technology-based offsets involving energy efficiency often lack additionality because many projects receiving revenue now would have been built regardless.

Technology-Based Carbon Offset Con #1

To be beneficial, energy-efficiency offsets must be additional. This means the carbon emissions reductions would not have occurred without intervention.

But energy-efficiency projects are often not additional because many projects receiving revenue now would have been built regardless. 

One of the main pros of energy efficiency is lower energy costs, which can drive market expansion. For example, since 2020, global markets have contributed approximately $1 trillion towards energy efficiency-related practices involving buildings, transportation, infrastructure, and electric vehicles. The large demand for energy-efficient practices, in general, means that the infrastructure could have been built independently of energy-efficiency carbon offsets. 

In short, additionality is not guaranteed with energy-efficiency offsets because many projects are already in high demand and would have been built regardless.

Con #2: Technology-Based Carbon Offsets Can Be Expensive

Technology-based offsets involving direct carbon/air capture (DCC/DAC) and carbon mineralization offsets are some of the most expensive methods of carbon removal.

Technology-Based Carbon Offset Con #2

DCC/DAC offsets currency range anywhere from $250-$1200 per ton, the highest out of all carbon removal methods. Close behind are carbon mineralization offsets, which currently range anywhere from $82 – $1,200 per ton of CO₂. Both are dependent on the type of technology, the type of energy source, and the scale of the operation.

In comparison, nature-based carbon offsets involving reforestation, afforestation, REDD+, and blue carbon offsets can cost less than $50 per ton. 

DCC/DAC and carbon mineralization offsets are so expensive because there are still relatively few companies and projects in operation. As more companies and projects are developed, costs could drop over the next decade. 

In short, technology-based carbon offsets such as DCC/DAC and carbon mineralization are some of the more expensive methods of carbon removal. With further research, development, and funding, this could decrease in the coming years. 

Con #3: Technology-Based Carbon Offsets Are Not Yet At A Scale Where They Can Compensate For Our Global Carbon Emissions

Technology-based carbon offsets are not yet at a scale where they can compensate for our global carbon emissions.

Technology-Based Carbon Offset Con #3

Carbon offsets in general are currently not sufficient to compensate for all of our carbon emissions. We emit more than 37 billion tons of carbon annually, but carbon offset credits for only ~1 billion tons of CO₂ have been listed for sale on the voluntary market. The number of sellers also exceeds the number of buyers by about 600-700 million tons. 

Because technology-based offsets are only a small subsection of the larger carbon offset market, they are also inadequate in terms of offsetting our global emissions.

There are relatively few companies engaged in DCC/DAC practices and the technology is still expensive to implement; therefore, the amount of carbon it can remove is limited. But the recent push for more DCC/DAC technology means that its capacity is increasing. Climeworks began construction in 2022 for its newest plant, Mammoth, which will have an annual carbon capture capacity of 36,000 tons, nine times that of its current plant Orca.

There are also relatively few companies engaged in carbon mineralization on a commercial level, and processes, standards, and technologies still need to be developed to ensure proper monitoring, verification, and reporting of carbon sequestration via mineralization. Experts estimate that carbon mineralization could be scaled up to capture 2-4 billion tons of CO₂ per year by 2050. 

Experts also predict the world’s population will increase by 2 billion people in the next 30 years. More people means more mouths to feed and more waste generated; therefore, GHG emissions from agriculture and waste will continue to increase. We already emit approximately 570 million tons of CH₄ and generate over 2 billion tons of waste. 

In short, technology-based carbon offsets involving DCC/DAC, carbon mineralization, energy efficiency, and waste management are not yet scaled to keep pace with our global carbon emissions. 

Con #4: Technology-Based Carbon Offsets Can Be Difficult To Monitor and Verify

Technology-based carbon offsets involving energy efficiency, waste management, and agriculture can be difficult to monitor and verify.

Technology-Based Carbon Offset Con #4

Energy-efficient practices promote energy decentralization, where power is generated at or near locations where it will be used. And although this decreases the need to transport energy and generates environmental benefits, it can also make project standardization and monitoring difficult.

By nature, centralized solutions are easier to keep track of. But there are different standards for different types of energy-efficiency practices. Appliances, lighting, buildings, cooking, and fuels are held to different standards, making it difficult to standardize energy efficiency as one singular entity. 

Agricultural emissions themselves are also difficult to measure and manage because there are hundreds of millions of farmers around the world, most of which are farming small plots of land. In order to exact change on a global scale, we would have to incorporate agricultural offset practices such as biochar, agroforestry, and methane capture on a massive scale and for hundreds of years into the future. This would be difficult to do both socially and economically.

In short, the fact that there are multiple types of energy efficiency, waste management, and agricultural carbon offsets makes them difficult to standardize, verify, and monitor. 

Con #5: Technology-Based Carbon Offsets Do Not Reduce Your Own Carbon Emissions

Technology-based carbon offsets do not reduce your own carbon emissions, which can lead to greenwashing.

Technology-Based Carbon Offset Con #5

One of the main limitations of carbon offsetting, in general, is that purchasing a carbon offset does not directly reduce your carbon footprint. It only makes others reduce their carbon footprint to compensate for your carbon footprint. 

If emissions are only offset and not reduced from the source, this could lead to greenwashing, when the consumer is deceived into thinking they are offsetting their emissions but in reality, they are not. Companies accused of greenwashing either invest in non-verified credits, do not prioritize in-house emissions reductions, or double-count carbon credits. Or sometimes, all of the above.

In short, because technology-based carbon offsets do not reduce your own emissions, they could lead to greenwashing.

How Could You Offset Your Own Carbon Footprint With Technology-Based Carbon Offsets

The market for carbon offsets was small in the year 2000, but by 2010 it had already grown to represent nearly $10 billion worldwide. The voluntary carbon offset market (VCM) is where everyday consumers can purchase carbon offsets to offset their carbon emissions. 

The Ecosystem Marketplace predicts the VCM can grow to $50B by the year 2050. And because technology-based carbon offsets are effective and efficient at reducing carbon emissions, they are predicted to make up an increasingly larger share of this market.

How Can Technology-Based Carbon Offsets Help Mitigate Climate Change

Climate change is a severe and long-term consequence of fossil fuel combustion. Technology-based offsets can help mitigate climate change because they eliminate fossil-fuel-derived carbon from our atmosphere which, if left untreated, can remain there for tens of thousands of years and exacerbate the negative effects of climate change.

How is Climate Change Defined

Climate change is arguably the most severe, long-term global impact of fossil fuel combustion. Every year, approximately 33 billion tons (bt) of CO₂ are emitted from burning fossil fuels. The carbon found in fossil fuels reacts with oxygen in the air to produce CO₂. 

“Climate change: changes in the earth’s weather, including changes in temperature, wind patterns and rainfall, especially the increase in the temperature of the earth’s atmosphere that is caused by the increase of particular gasses, especially carbon dioxide.”

Oxford Dictionary

Atmospheric CO₂ fuels climate change, which results in global warming. When CO₂ and other air pollutants absorb sunlight and solar radiation in the atmosphere, it traps the heat and acts as an insulator for the planet. Since the Industrial Revolution, Earth’s temperature has risen a little more than 1 degree Celsius (C), or 2 degrees Fahrenheit (F). Between 1880-1980 the global temperature rose by 0.07C every 10 years. This rate has more than doubled since 1981, with a current global annual temperature rise of 0.18C, or 0.32F, for every 10 years. 

How Do Carbon Offsets Generally Help Mitigate Climate Change

Levels of carbon in our atmosphere that cause climate change have increased as a result of human emissions since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution in 1750. The global average concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere today registers at over 400 parts per million. Carbon offsets can help prevent these levels from increasing even more.

When you hear the words “carbon offset”, think about the term “compensation”. Essentially, carbon offsets are reductions in GHG emissions that are used to compensate for emissions occurring elsewhere. 

Carbon offsets that meet key criteria and verified project standards, are additional and permanent, and are part of projects that are carried out until the end of their lifespan have the best chance of reducing carbon emissions and therefore reducing climate change. 

As outlined in the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement, we must cut current greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 50% by 2030 and reach net zero by 2050. Technology-based offsets are important to meet these targets because it eliminates carbon, which when emitted, can remain in our atmosphere for tens of thousands of years.

How Do Technology-Based Carbon Offsets Specifically Help Mitigate Climate Change

Direct carbon/air capture and carbon mineralization offsets specifically help mitigate climate change because these methods permanently lock away CO₂ for thousands of years with little to no carbon re-emission.

Waste management offsets involving landfill gas capture/combustion, landfill gas to renewable energy, biodigesters, biogas, and composting specifically help mitigate climate change because they capture emissions from waste, turning it into renewable energy and reducing the total amount of waste. 

Energy-efficiency offsets involving clean cookstoves, water filtration programs, and co-generation facilities specifically help mitigate climate change by reducing CO₂ emissions from direct fossil fuel combustion and from indirect electricity generation. By using energy-efficient appliances and methodologies, we reduce the amount of CO₂ entering our atmosphere. 

Agricultural offsets including CH₄ capture can specifically help mitigate climate change because they reduce CO₂ and CH₄ emissions in one of the biggest industries worldwide.

What Are Better Alternatives to Technology-Based Carbon Offsets

If used correctly, technology-based carbon offsets can provide environmental, economic, and social benefits beyond reducing carbon emissions. They have the potential to instigate meaningful environmental change and begin to reverse some of the effects of climate change. 

However, we can’t let this method be a guilt-free way to reduce carbon emissions. Technology-based carbon offsets must be used with direct carbon reduction measures to reduce GHG emissions long term. 

These reduction measures don’t have to involve drastic changes either. Actions that may seem small can have a big impact because those small changes add up! You can reduce your carbon footprint in three main areas of your life: household, travel, and lifestyle. 

Reduce your household carbon footprint:

• Wash with cold water: Washing clothes in cold water could reduce carbon emissions by up to 11 million tons. Approximately 90% of the energy is used to heat the water, so switching to cold saves also saves energy.

• Replace incandescent bulbs with fluorescent bulbs: Fluorescent bulbs use 75% less energy than incandescent ones, saving energy and thus reducing electricity demand and GHG emissions.

Reduce your travel carbon footprint:

• Fly less: Aviation accounts for around 1.9% of global carbon emissions and 2.5% of CO₂. Air crafts run on jet gasoline, which is converted to CO₂ when burned.

• Walk or bike when possible: The most efficient ways of traveling are walking, bicycling, or taking the train. Using a bike instead of a car can reduce carbon emissions by 75%. These forms of transportation also provide lower levels of air pollution.

Reduce your lifestyle carbon footprint:

• Switch to renewable energy sources: The six most common types of renewable energy are solar, wind, hydro, tidal, geothermal, and biomass energy. They are a substitute for fossil fuels that can reduce the effects of global warming by limiting global carbon emissions and other pollutants.

• Recycle: Recycling uses less energy and deposits less waste in landfills. Less manufacturing and transportation energy costs means fewer carbon emissions generated. Less waste in landfills means less CH₄ is generated.
• Switch from single-use to sustainable products: Reusing products avoids resource extraction, reduces energy use, reduces waste generation, and can prevent littering.

• Eat less meat and dairy: Meat and dairy account for 14.5% of global GHG emissions, with beef and lamb being the most carbon-intensive. Globally, we consume much more meat than is considered sustainable, and switching to a vegan or vegetarian diet could reduce emissions. 

• Take shorter showers: Approximately 1.2 trillion gallons of water are used each year in the United States just for showering purposes, and showering takes up about 17% of residential water usage. The amount of water consumed and the energy cost of that consumption are directly related. The less water we use the less energy we use. And the less energy we use, the less of a negative impact we have on the environment.

Because technology-based carbon offsets are an indirect way and not a direct way of reducing emissions, they alone will not be enough to reduce global carbon emissions significantly. Direct measures of emission reductions, such as reducing individual energy use and consumption, are better alternatives to these offsets. 

Final Thoughts

Technology-based carbon offsets can be permanent, immediate, cost-effective, have low rates of carbon re-emission, and bolster energy security, depending on the specific type of offset. However, they can also lack additionality, can be relatively expensive, may not be scaled to compensate for our global emissions, and can be difficult to monitor and verify, depending on the specific type of offset. 

Although they allow us to reduce carbon emissions in ways we wouldn’t be able to accomplish individually, they also do not reduce our own carbon emissions, which can lead to greenwashing.

For all of the good carbon offsets can instigate, they should not be seen as the only solution to climate change. They are effective at reducing CO₂ in the short term, but in the long term, they fail to reduce CO₂ enough. 

Carbon offsetting can be much more effective when used in conjunction with direct CO₂ reduction measures. We should reduce our own carbon footprint as much as possible first, and only then choose the most effective technology-based carbon offsets.

Stay impactful,

Sources

• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Offsets and RECs -What’s the Difference?
• Britannica: Carbon Offset
• David Suzuki Foundation: Are carbon offsets the answer to climate-altering flights?
• American University: What is Carbon Removal?
• South Pole: Carbon Offsets Explained
• International Energy Administration: Going carbon negative – What are the technology options?
• Impactful Ninja: What Are Direct Carbon Capture Offsets and How Do They Work
• Impactful Ninja: What Are Carbon Mineralization Offsets and How Do They Work
• Impactful Ninja: What Are Energy Efficiency Carbon Offsets and How Do They Work
• Impactful Ninja: What Are Waste Management Carbon Offsets and How Do They Work
• Impactful Ninja: What Are Agriculture Carbon Offsets and How Do They Work
• Impactful Ninja: What Are Technology-Based Carbon Offsets and How Do They Work? The Big Picture
• Carbfix: Homepage
• greenSand: Olivine Research & Evidence
• GreenPeace: The biggest problem with carbon offsetting is that it doesn’t really work
• Northwestern University: Enhanced weathering – When climate research takes unexpected turns
• Carbfix: Protecting Our Climate by Turning CO₂ Into Stone
• Native Energy: Noblehurst Family Farm Project
• New York State Department of Health: Important Things to Know About Landfill Gas
• CalRecycle: New Statewide Mandatory Organic Waste Collection
• US Environmental Protection Agency: Importance of Methane
• United Nations Environment Programme: Methane emissions are driving climate change. Here’s how to reduce them
• Carbonfund: Homepage
• Ecologi: Homepage
• myclimate: Homepage
• greenSand: Homepage
• Terrapass: Homepage
• Vi Agroforestry: Homepage
• One Tree Planted: Homepage
• Impactful Ninja: What is the Carbon Footprint of Fossil Fuels?
• International Energy Administration: Energy Security
• US Environmental Protection Agency: Summary of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
• United States Environmental Protection Agency: Distributed Generation of Electricity and its Environmental Impacts
• Impactful Ninja: Why is a Carbon Footprint Bad for the Environment
• United Nations Convention Framework on Climate Change: The Paris Agreement
• Our World in Data: Which form of transport has the smallest carbon footprint?
• Cold Water Saves: Washing Laundry In Cold Water Protects A Lot More Than Just Our Clothing
• GlobalGiving: 50 Tips To Cut Down Your Carbon Footprint
• Carbon Offset Guide: Additionality
• Vox: RECs, which put the “green” in green electricity, explained
• International Energy Administration: Executive Summary – Energy Efficiency 2022
• World Resources Institute: Direct Air Capture – 6 Things to Know
• Climeworks: Subscriptions
• greenSand: Certificate – CO₂ Compensation
• Statista: Annual carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions worldwide from 1940 to 2022
• Yale Environment 360: Is the ‘Legacy’ Carbon Credit Market a Climate Plus or Just Hype?
• Climeworks: Orca
• Climeworks: Mammoth
• American University: Fact Sheet – Enhanced Mineralization
• United Nations: Population
• International Energy Agency: Methane tracker 2020
• The World Counts: World Waste Facts
• Environmental and Energy Study Institute: Fact Sheet | Energy Efficiency Standards for Appliances, Lighting and Equipment (2017)
• Massachusetts Institute of Technology Climate Portal: Soil-Based Carbon Sequestration
• Edie: Carbon offsetting – How are businesses avoiding greenwashing on the road to net-zero?
• Carbon Offset Guide: Voluntary Offset Programs
• Ecosystem Marketplace: Voluntary Carbon Markets Top $1 Billion in 2021 with Newly Reported Trades
• Impactful Ninja: Best Technology-Based Carbon Offsets
• Climeworks: Homepage
• Neustark: Homepage
• DelAgua: Homepage
• CoreZero: Homepage
• Native Energy: Homepage
• GreenTech: Homepage
• World Nuclear Association: Carbon Emissions from Electricity
• Natural Resources Defense Council: Global Warming 101
• myclimate: What does “net zero emissions” mean?
• Natural Resources Defense Council: Carbon Offsets 101
• Terrapass: Carbon Offset Projects
• Carbon Offset Guide: Permanence
• United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change: Paris Climate Agreement
• The Ocean Foundation: Reduce Your Carbon Footprint 
• Energy Information Administration: Renewable Energy Explained 
• Energy Star: Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs (CFLs) and Mercury
• Our World in Data: Where in the world do people have the highest CO₂ emissions from flying?
• Zero Waste Europe: Reusable vs Single Use Packaging
• Carbonbrief: Interactive – What is the climate impact of eating meat and dairy?
• Stop Waste: Recycling and Climate Protection
• Impactful Ninja: Is Taking Long Showers Bad for the Environment?
• United States Environmental Protection Agency: Showerheads
• Impactful Ninja: 4 Main Reasons Why Reducing Your Carbon Footprint is Important