Carbon Neutral Versus Net-Zero
by the W&S Sustainability, Nature and Climate Editorial Team
SHARE ON:
Why Terms in Sustainability and Environmentalism Are Not So Easily Understood
The world is increasingly becoming aware of the impact of human activities on the environment, and this has led to the creation of various initiatives aimed at mitigating these impacts. However, there are often different terms used to describe these initiatives, and it can be difficult for the general public to understand the nuances of each term. Two such terms are "carbon neutral" and "net-zero," which are often used interchangeably but actually have distinct meanings.
One reason why sustainability and environmental terminology can be difficult to understand is the complex nature of the issues they address. Environmental problems are often multifaceted, and solutions can involve a range of disciplines, from science and technology to politics and economics. This complexity can make it challenging for the public to fully comprehend the issues at hand and the best ways to address them.
Another reason is the lack of consistency in how terms are used. Terms such as "sustainability" and "carbon footprint" can have different meanings depending on the context in which they are used, making it difficult to communicate and understand their importance accurately.
Moreover, the misuse or overuse of terms can lead to confusion and skepticism among the public. For example, some companies claim to be "green" or "eco-friendly" without any evidence to support these claims. Such practices can create confusion and mistrust, ultimately undermining the public's confidence in environmental initiatives.
Overall, the lack of understanding and consistency in sustainability and environmental terminology can be a significant barrier to effective communication and action. As such, it is essential to promote clear and consistent communication about environmental issues and initiatives to enable meaningful public engagement and support.
What the Term “Carbon-Neutral” Means
The concept of carbon neutrality emerged in response to the growing concern about the impact of human activity on the environment, particularly in relation to the issue of greenhouse gas emissions. The term was first coined in the early 1990s by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its first report, which defined carbon neutrality as a condition in which the net amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions resulting from an activity is zero.
Carbon neutrality has become a popular goal for companies, governments, and individuals seeking to reduce their carbon footprint and mitigate climate change. To achieve carbon neutrality, organizations typically calculate their greenhouse gas emissions, implement strategies to reduce those emissions, and then offset any remaining emissions through the purchase of carbon credits or the support of carbon reduction projects. This process is known as carbon offsetting and has been criticized for allowing organizations to continue emitting greenhouse gasses rather than reducing their emissions directly.
Critics of carbon neutrality argue that it places too much emphasis on carbon dioxide as the primary driver of climate change, neglecting other greenhouse gasses such as methane and nitrous oxide, which have a more potent warming effect. Additionally, some argue that carbon neutrality does not go far enough and that organizations should aim for net-zero emissions, which would require not only reducing emissions but also removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere through carbon capture and storage or other means.
Despite its limitations, carbon neutrality remains a widely recognized and accepted concept in the field of sustainability and environmentalism. The term has been embraced by governments, organizations, and individuals alike as a way to take action against climate change and reduce their impact on the environment.
Wondering why you’re seeing ads? Check out our Disclosure Policy.
What the Term “Net-Zero” Means
Net-zero is a term that has gained traction in recent years as a more ambitious target than carbon neutrality. The term was first introduced in the context of the energy sector, specifically in relation to the concept of net-zero emissions. This refers to the balance between the amount of greenhouse gas emissions produced and the amount removed from the atmosphere.
The origins of the term can be traced back to a report commissioned by the UK government's Department of Energy and Climate Change in 2008, which was titled "Building a Low Carbon Economy – the UK's Contribution to Tackling Climate Change." The report included a section on "Net Carbon Abatement," which referred to the balance between emissions reduction and emissions removal. The term "net-zero" was not used in the report, but the concept of a balance between emissions and removals laid the groundwork for the development of the term.
Since then, the term has been adopted more broadly in discussions around climate change and sustainability, with the goal of achieving net-zero emissions becoming a more widely recognized target. In 2019, the UK became the first major economy to legislate for net-zero emissions by 2050. This was followed by similar pledges from other countries and companies around the world.
However, there have been critiques of the term and its limitations. Some argue that the focus on net-zero emissions obscures the need for immediate and significant emissions reductions. Others argue that the term allows for the continued use of fossil fuels with the expectation that emissions will be offset through carbon capture and storage or other methods, which may not be feasible or sustainable in the long term.
Wondering why you’re seeing ads? Check out our Disclosure Policy.
Carbon Neutral vs. Net-Zero Examples
Let's start with a simple example to understand the difference between carbon neutral and net-zero. Imagine you have a car, and you want to make it carbon neutral. You decide to buy carbon offsets, which means you fund a project that reduces greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to the amount of emissions your car produces. For example, if your car produces 2 tons of carbon dioxide emissions in a year, you would buy carbon offsets that reduce 2 tons of emissions in a different project, such as a wind farm or a reforestation project. By doing this, your car becomes carbon neutral because the emissions it produces are offset by the emissions reduced elsewhere.
Now, let's take this example further and explore net-zero. If you want to make your car net-zero, you need to go beyond just buying carbon offsets. Net-zero means that your car's emissions are not only offset but also reduced to zero. To achieve net-zero, you would need to replace your car's internal combustion engine with an electric motor or other zero-emission technology. This way, your car would produce zero emissions, and you wouldn't need to buy carbon offsets to offset them.
Another example of net-zero is a building that uses renewable energy to generate more energy than it consumes. This is called a net-zero energy building. For example, the Bullitt Center in Seattle is a net-zero energy commercial building that uses solar panels and geothermal heating to produce more energy than it consumes. The building also uses rainwater harvesting and composting toilets to reduce its water usage.
In the context of climate change, achieving net-zero emissions is crucial to limit global warming to 1.5°C, as outlined in the Paris Agreement. To achieve this goal, countries and businesses need to transition to net-zero emissions by 2050.
In summary, while carbon-neutral aims to offset emissions, net-zero goes further by eliminating emissions altogether. The examples we’ve discussed show that it is possible to achieve both carbon neutrality and net-zero in different contexts, from personal cars to large commercial buildings, but it requires a combination of strategies and technologies to get there.
Wondering why you’re seeing ads? Check out our Disclosure Policy.
