Facebook Pixel

Berkeley Carbon Trading Project

The Berkeley Carbon Trading Project at CEPP is a research and outreach program dedicated to studying the effectiveness of carbon trading and offset programs and ensuring that this understanding informs program design.  

In this brief moment when avoiding the worst impacts of climate change is still within reach, a surge of corporate climate commitments and quickly evolving state, national, and international climate policies is being undermined by the heavy use of carbon offsets. Carbon offsets allow businesses to claim a lower carbon footprint by paying someone else to reduce emissions. Research performed by us and others has found that most offset credits traded on the market today represent far less than their claimed benefits. This failure squanders funds, good will, and precious time when real decarbonization could not be more urgent. 

Our interdisciplinary research and outreach program is focused ensuring that carbon trading and offsetting programs support rather than undermine effective climate action. 

New at the BCTP

February 16, 2024: We submitted public comments to the CFTCComment on Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) Guidance Regarding the Listing of Voluntary Carbon Credit Derivative Contracts, RIN 3038–AF40

January 31, 2024: We coauthored a commentary, Instead of Carbon Offsets, We Need ‘Contributions’ to Forests, in Stanford Social Innovation Review in collaboration with the Wilkes Center for Climate Science & Policy at the University of Utah.

January 23, 2024: Our article Pervasive over-crediting from cookstove offset methodologies was published in Nature Sustainability. We comprehensively and quantitatively assessed the quality of five cookstoves offset methodologies, finding that they likely over-credit by around ten times. We offer specific actionable recommendations for revising the methodologies, and in the mean time, methods that can be used by individual projects, to accurately estimate project benefits.

⇒ Coverage by the Financial Times
⇒ Coverage by the Guardian 

Publications   

Publications from BCTP:

Instead of Carbon Offsets, We Need ‘Contributions’ to Forests, Libby Blanchard, William R.L. Anderegg, Barbara K. Haya. (2024, January 31) Stanford Social Innovation Review. Written in collaboration with the Wilkes Center for Climate Science & Policy at the University of Utah.

 

Pervasive over-crediting from cookstove offset methodologies, Annelise Gill-Wiehl, Daniel M. Kammen & Barbara K. Haya. (2024). Nature Sustainainability.  DOI: 10.1038/s41893-023-01259-6

⇒ Coverage by the Financial Times
⇒ Coverage by the Guardian
⇒ Coverage by Heatmap News
⇒ Coverage by AFP News & Barrons
⇒ See our cookstoves carbon offset project page

Quality Assessment of REDD+ Carbon Credit Projects, Barbara K. Haya, Kelsey Alford-Jones, William R. L. Anderegg, Betsy Beymer-Farris, Libby Blanchard, Barbara Bomfim, Dylan Chin,  Samuel Evans, Marie Hogan, Jennifer A. Holm, Kathleen McAfee, Ivy So, Thales A. P. West, Lauren Withey. (2023, September 15). Berkeley Carbon Trading Project

⇒ Coverage by Bloomberg
⇒ Coverage by the Guardian
⇒ See our REDD+ offset project page

Comprehensive review of carbon quantification by improved forest management offset protocols, Barbara K. Haya, Samuel Evans, Letty Brown, Jacob Bukoski, Van Butsic, Bodie Cabiyo, Rory Jacobson, Amber Kerr, Matthew Potts and Daniel L. Sanchez. (2023). Frontiers in Forests and Global Change. DOI: 10.3389/ffgc.2023.958879

⇒ Coverage by Bloomberg

Pervasive over-crediting from cookstoves offset methodologies, Annelise Gill-Wiehl, Daniel Kammen, Barbara K. Haya. (2023). Preprint. DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-2606020/v1 

 

 


Managing Uncertainty in Carbon Offsets: Insights from California’s Standardized Approach, Barbara Haya, Danny Cullenward, Aaron L. Strong, Emily Grubert, Robert Heilmayr, Deborah Sivas & Michael Wara. (2020). Climate Policy. DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2020.1781035.

⇒ Coverage by MIT Technology Review
⇒ Coverage by KQED
⇒ Earlier working paper version

The California Air Resources Board’s US Forest offset protocol underestimates leakage, Barbara Haya. (2019). Goldman School of Public Policy Working Paper.

⇒ Coverage by MIT Technology Review
⇒ Coverage by Berkeley News

 

Carbon Offsets in California: Science in the Policy Development Process, Barbara Haya, Aaron Strong, Emily Grubert, Danny Cullenward. (2016). Book chapter in: In New Trends in Communicating Risk and Resiliency: A Multi-Disciplinary Approach to Global Environmental Change, eds. J. Eichelberger, K. Taylor & Y. Kontar. Springer.

 

 

Key publications coauthored by our team: 

Policy challenges to enhance soil carbon sinks: the dirty part of making contributions to the Paris agreement by the United States, Stephen M. Ogle, Richard T. Conant, Bart Fischer, Barbara K. Haya, Dale T. Manning, Bruce A. McCarl, and Tamara Jane Zelikova. (2023). Carbon Management, 14(1). DOI: 10.1080/17583004.2023.2268071

Little evidence of management change in California’s forest offset program, Jared Stapp, Christoph Nolte, Matthew Potts, Matthias Baumann, Barbara K. Haya, Van Butsic. (2023). Communications Earth & Environmenthttps://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-023-00984-2
          ⇒ Coverage by Bloomberg

Managing Nature-based Solutions in Fire-prone Ecosystems: Competing Management Objectives in California Forests Evaluated at a Landscape Scale, Claudia Herbert, Barbara K. Haya, Scott L. Stephens, and Van Butsic. (2022). Frontiers in Forests and Global Change. DOI: 10.3389/ffgc.2022.957189

Systematic over-crediting in California’s forest carbon offsets program, Grayson Badgley, Jeremy Freeman, Joseph J. Hamman, Barbara Haya, Anna T. Trugman, William R.L. Anderegg, & Danny Cullenward. (2021). Global Change Biology. DOI: 10.1111/gcb.15943.  
          ⇒ Paper summary     ⇒ Coverage by ProPublica and MIT Technology Review

Policy Engagement 

Comment letters 

Comment on Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) Guidance Regarding the Listing of Voluntary Carbon Credit Derivative Contracts, RIN 3038–AF40, submitted to the CFTC on February 16, 2024

Comment on Requirements for the development and assessment of Article 6.4 mechanism methodologies and Article 6.4 validation and verification standard for projects, submitted to the UN Article 6.4 Supervisory Body on October 29, 2023

Academic letter in support of AB 1305 and SB 390 (voluntary carbon offsets), submitted to Assembly Member Jesse Gabriel and Senator Monique Limon of the California state legislature on April 17, 2023

Comments to the GHG Protocol on Market-based Accounting Approaches, submitted to the GHG Protocol via their on line survey on March 14, 2023

Comments to the California Air Resources Board on Recommended Changes to its US Forest Projects Offset Protocol, submitted to the California Air Resources Board on December 15, 2022

Comments on the Intergrity Council for the Voluntary Offset Market (ICVCM) draft Core Carbon Principles, Assessment Framework, and Assessment Framework, submitted to the ICVCM on September 27, 2022

Comments to the US Securities and Exchange Commission on the proposed offsets provisions under its Proposed Rule on The Enhancement and Standardization of Climate-Related Disclosures for Investors [File No. S7-10-22], submitted to the SEC on June 17, 2022

Comments on the Climate Action Reserve's draft U.S. Landfill Protocol v6.0, submitted to CAR on June 8, 2022

Comments on proposed new VCS methodology - Improved Forest Management through Targeted, Short-Term Harvest Deferral, submitted to Verra on April 22, 2022

Comments on Verra's proposed updates on tonne-year accounting, submitted to Verra on April 8, 2022

Comments on the May 2021 Public Consultation Report of the Taskforce on Scaling Voluntary Carbon Markets (TSVCM), submitted June 21,2021

Public comments submitted on ART TREES 2.0, submitted by Barbara Haya and Matthew D. Potts to Winrock April 2, 2021.

Comments on the Initial Recommendations of the Taskforce on Scaling Voluntary Carbon Markets (TSVCM), submitted to the TSVCM on January 5, 2021.

Comments on ARB’s proposed endorsement of the Tropical Forest Standard: environmental integrity concerns, submitted to the California Air Resources Board on August 29, 2019.

Joint comments on the challenges of monitoring the implementation of California's proposed Tropical Forest Standard, submitted to the California Air Resources Board on August 29, 2019.

Joint comment letter from 110 social and conservation scientists on California’s proposed Tropical Forest Standard (TFS), submitted to the California Air Resources Board on November 14, 2018.

Joint comments submitted to the California Air Resources Board on methods for determining whether offset projects result in Direct Environmental Benefits in the State (DEBS), Submitted July 20, 2018.

Comments submitted to the California Air Resources Board on proposed amendments to the state's cap-and-trade regulation, Submitted May 10, 2018.

Comments submitted to the California Air Resources Board on proposed amendments to the state's cap-and-trade regulation, Submitted Mar. 16, 2018.

Comments submitted to the California Air Resources Board on the state’s draft Climate Change Scoping Plan Update – the proposed strategy for achieving California’s 2030 greenhouse gas target, Submitted Nov. 21, 2016.

Comments submitted to the California Air Resources Board on the state’s proposed REDD program and linkage with Acre, Brazil, Submitted June 4, 2016.

Fact sheets

Fact Sheet: The Size of California’s Carbon Offset Program, last updated June 12, 2018.

Fact Sheet: California’s U.S. Forest Offset Protocol Over-credits Reductions, prepared June 6, 2017.

California’s Carbon Offsets Program — the Offset Limit Explained. This slide deck visually describes California’s offsets limit, and offers the data tables in a separate tab.

Presentations

California’s cap-and-trade and offsets programs – Lessons for Oregon, Presentation to Engineers for a Sustainable Future, co-organized with Center for Sustainable Economy. October 9, 2018. Portland, OR.

Project Pages

Cookstoves

Visit our cookstoves offset website for a summary of our research and findings, background info, and guidance for credit buyers and cookstove offset project developers.

REDD+

Visit our REDD+ project webpage to download the report.

Offset Program Development for the University of California |

The Berkeley Carbon Trading Project, jointly with the California Institute for Energy and Environment, led the development the University of California's strategy for procuring offsets that are high quality, support scalable climate solutions, and fulfill the University’s mission of research, education, and public service. The broader goal of this work is to explore, model, and develop methods, resources, and guidelines for how institutions of higher education and major offset buyers can procure high quality offsets aligned with institutional mission. 

This project put research to action, and conducted research through action. We researched the quality of a range of offset projects and project types on the market and developed methods for performing these analyses for use by the University system and other buyers. We also initiated and ran an innovative offset program, supporting the University in developing its own offset projects. Each of the University's twelve pilot UC-initiated offset projects grew out of, supported, and applied University research; were initiated by University faculty, researchers, students, and staff; and engaged students.

In the end, procuring quality offsets proved to be more difficult than expected. In summer 2023, the University system decided to move away from procuring offsets and instead accelerated its direct decarbonization process. The Berkeley Carbon Trading Project is continuing the effort of evaluating offset project types on the voluntary carbon market, seaking quality credits, and refining standards and methods for rigorously doing these evaluations. 

Visit our project page for a summary of the process and our findings and all of the materials we developed during this three-year project

Voluntary Registry Offsets Database 

The Voluntary Registry Offsets Database contains all carbon offset projects, credit issuances, and credit retirements listed globally by four major voluntary offset project registries—Climate Action Reserve (CAR), American Carbon Registry (ACR), Verra, and Gold Standard. 

      Visit the Voluntary Registry Offset Database page 

Repository of Articles on Offset Quality 

We are building and will keep updating a repository of peer-reviewed articles and independent research institute reports that analyze the quality of offset projects and protocols (also called methodologies). 

      Visit the Repository webpage

Podcasts 

TILclimate Podcast: About Carbon Offsets, by the MIT Environmental Solutions Initiative, November 17, 2022

The FinReg Pod: The Problem with Carbon Offsets, with Lee Reiners, Executive Director, Global Financial Markets Center, Duke University, March 2, 2022

Climate One Podcast: Clearing the Air on Climate Offsets, The Commonwealth Club, July 2, 2021

The Pie: Are Carbon Offsets Bogus?, University of Chicago Becker Friedman Institute & WBEZChicago, April 22, 2021

PRX Radio - Outside/In: The Forest for the Carbon, November 19, 2020

Climate One Podcast: Carbon Offsets: Privileged Pollution?, The Commonwealth Club, August 30, 2019

In the News 

Our research has been covered by New York Times, Financial Times, BBC World News, ProPublica, MIT Technology Review, NPR, The Washington Post, Grist, CNN, Wired, LA Times, Bloomberg News, and other news outlets.

Our most recent coverage:

Inside Climate News, March 12, 2024, Can Carbon Offsets Save a Fragile Band of Belize’s Tropical Rainforest?: Conservationists are racing to save what’s left of the largest tropical forest in Central America, as commercial farming and population growth threaten to cleave it in two, by Nicholas Kusnetz

Reuters, February 15, 2024, Can clean cookstoves ride out the carbon markets storm?, by Ben Payton

Barron's with news from AFP News, January 23, 2024, Carbon-cutting Benefit Of Cookstoves Vastly Overestimated: Study, by Mathilde Dumazet 

Financial Times, January 23, 2024, Carbon credits from cookstove emissions largely worthless, study finds, by Kenza Bryan

The Guardian, January 23, 2024, Cookstove carbon offsets overstate climate benefit by 1,000%, study finds, by Patrick Greenfield

Heatmap News, January 23, 2024, Carbon Offsets From Clean Cookstoves Are Kind of Bogus, Too: A new study from the University of California, Berkeley, breaks down the issues, while also stirring up a controversy of its own, by Emily Pontecorvo

Berkeley News, January 23, 2024, As carbon offsets, cookstove emission credits are greatly overestimated 

Reuters, January 18, 2024, Carbon markets have a long shot at redemption, by George Hay (on the ETA)

Cookstoves: Is the multibillion dollar carbon offset market flawed?Channel 4 News in the UK, December 15, 2023, Cookstoves: Is the multibillion dollar carbon offset market flawed?

 

Our response to the story

Channel 4 UK visited a VCS cookstove offset project in Malawi and documented just what is at stake with these projects. Efficient stoves, and effective subsidies for them, can save lives and forests. But the reporters found that more than half of the households they visited were not using the stoves they had been given because the stoves had broken, even though the developer had claimed 100% of stoves were operating. This is aligned with our study findings that an important source of over-crediting from cookstoves offset projects is unrealistic assumptions about actual stove use. The reporters also find that excess crediting by cookstoves offset methodologies is undermining trust in the offset market and its ability to support these projects going forward. 

Before our preprint was released, we met with the project developer to hear his concerns. During his interview with Channel 4, he was offered the chance to respond to our study findings. He offered two arguments, both of which are objectively false:

(1) The project developer’s main criticism was that the study authors “have never been to Africa, never been to the villages… do not know the real world” 

This is monumentally incorrect. Annelise Gill-Wiehl, the study first author, researched and wrote the article from a village in Tanzania where she was living for two years researching access to clean cooking fuels. Annelise has spent 7+ years researching clean cooking in rural Tanzania. Dr. Kammen has done extensive fieldwork over his more than 30 year career researching clean energy in sub-Saharan Africa. Dr. Haya’s extensive expertise is in the analysis of the accuracy of carbon credit accounting programs, including field research in South Asia. In addition, our study builds on extensive literature of field studies on cookstove projects performed by other field-based researchers, stretching back over decades. 

(2) The project developer says that we claim that only around 30% of the carbon loss from wood collection from cooking is non-renewable (does not grow back) and thus should be allowed to generate credits.  

The renewability for fuelwood varies tremendously across the globe and extensive research has created global maps of forest loss and regrowth. The leading science on non-renewable biomass and best method and values we have to date, come from a model called MoFuSS (Modelling Fuelwood Sustainability Scenarios), a peer-reviewed, transparent, accessible open-source analysis. MoFuSS runs multi-year simulations which compare intervention (i.e., actions to reduce extraction on non-renewable biomass such as through efficient cookstove projects) and non-intervention scenarios that incorporate dynamic variables like population growth, urbanization, and land cover change. We recommend using the most recent published data on regrowth rates from MoFuSS for the specific location of the project. For Dedza district, Malawi, the location of the project Channel 4 visited, this value should be 49%. In contrast, the project claims that 91% of the trees cut down for cooking purposes are greater than annual regrowth, another source of over-crediting. 

Improving current methodologies so they do not over-credit is imperative to a functioning effective offset market. Until the methodologies are improved, our preprint offers a way forward for project developers to make methodological choices that do not over-credit. We also recommend choosing fuel switch projects that reduce smoke enough to significantly improve the health of stove users. Offset credit buyers can seek out these projects. We will release a website (coming soon!) with clear guidelines for project developers and credit buyers.

MIT Technology Review, November 30, 2023, The University of California has all but dropped carbon offsets—and thinks you should, too

NBC News, November 29, 2023, Behind the world’s first ‘zero-carbon’ arena, a questionable carbon credit market: Climate Pledge Arena in Seattle is as green as buildings get, but doubts about some Colombian rainforest carbon credits used to offset its construction highlight how challenging it is to zero out emissions.

The Economist, November 20, 2023, Trees alone will not save the world

Financial Times, November 15, 2023, Sylvera aims to bring more rigour to carbon offset market

Energy Monitor, November 3, 2023, Are forest-based carbon offsets worth saving?

Wall Street Journal, October 30, 2023, He Pioneered Carbon Offsets to Save Tropical Forests. Now the Market Is Collapsing.

Barron's, October 29, 2023, COP28 Faces Debate Over Controversy-mired Carbon Credits

Project Sindicate, Commentary by Mateo Estrada, The Carbon-Offset Market's Broken Promises

CNBC, October 6, 2023, How Apple made its first ‘carbon neutral’ product

Carbon Brief, September 24, 2023, In-depth Q&A: Can ‘carbon offsets’ help to tackle climate change?

Bloomberg, September 21, 2023, Carbon Offsets Undercut California’s Climate Progress, Researchers Find

Bloomberg, September 15, 2023, Offset Market Hit by Fresh Allegations of False CO2 Claims

The Guardian, September 15, 2023, Rainforest carbon credit schemes misleading and ineffective, finds report

Climate Home News, August 25, 2023, Cooking the books: cookstove offsets produce millions of fake emission cuts

AP, July 15, 2023, Farm fields don’t just feed us. They store carbon. But a big question is how much

Bloomberg News, June 26, 2023, Canada Wildfires Burn Carbon Offset Project, Raise ESG Concerns

The New Republic, June 15, 2023, Climate Fraud on America's Last Frontier

Inside Climate News, June 23, 2023, Carbon Credit Market Seizes On a New Opportunity: Plugging Oil and Gas Wells

MIT Technology Review, June 12, 2023, Rivian hopes to earn carbon credits for its home electric vehicle chargers

Bloomberg, March 21, 2023, Carbon Offset Gatekeepers Are Failing to Stop Junk Credits

CNBC, March 21, 2023, Major registries in the carbon offset market are allowing dubious credits, report says

Forbes, March 6, 2023, A Floundering Fintech's Risky Reboot

Washington Post, February 21, 2023, Corporate Climate Promises Don’t Add Up

flip and WirtschaftsWoche, February 3, 2023, Der Klima-DiscounterMacht Bäume pflanzen ein Kohlekraftwerk klimaneutral? [in German]

Forbes, January 25, 2023, The Carbon Credit Market Confuses The Corporate World

E&E News, January 23, 2023, Here’s what we know about Kerry’s offset gambit
The Guardian, January 18, 2023, Revealed: more than 90% of rainforest carbon offsets by biggest provider are worthless, analysis shows

The Guardian, January 18, 2023, ‘Nowhere else to go’: forest communities of Alto Mayo, Peru, at centre of offsetting row

SourceMaterial, January 18, 2023, The Carbon Con: The world’s biggest companies, from Netflix to Ben & Jerry’s, are pouring billions into an offsetting industry whose climate claims appear increasingly at odds with reality

Bloomberg Green, November 20, 2022, Junk Carbon Offsets Are What Make These Big Companies ‘Carbon Neutral’

Mongabay, November 4, 2022, Carbon offsets: A key tool for climate action, or a license to emit?

Time Magazine, October 21, 2022, Donating to Climate Charities Might Be Better Than Buying Carbon Offsets

The Verge, August 18, 2022 - Crypto Can't Fix Carbon Offsets - But Crypto Fans are Trying Anyway

Wirecutter, New York Times, June 30, 2022 - Does Buying a Carbon Offset for Your Laptop Really Help the Planet? 

Financial Times, June 7, 2022 - Critics Take Aim at ‘Wild West’ Carbon Offset Market

The Atlantic, May 20, 2022 - Scotland's Billionaires are Turning Climate Change into a Trophy Game

The Economist, May 19, 2022 - Offset markets struggle in the face of surging commodity prices

New York Times, May 18, 2022 - Do Airline Climate Offsets Really Work? Here’s the Good News, and the Bad

Global Sports Matters, May 12, 2022 - Seattle’s Climate Pledge Arena Wants to Set a ‘New Sustainability Bar for Sports.’ Can it Succeed?

Bloomberg Green, April 7, 2022 - The Biggest Crypto Effort to End Useless Carbon Offsets Is Backfiring

Bloomberg Green, March 17, 2022 - This Timber Company Sold Millions of Dollars of Useless Carbon Offsets

Bloomberg Green, February 17, 2022 - China says the 2022 Winter Olympics are carbon neutral. They aren't

Bloomberg News, February 14, 2022 - Green Groups Want Offsets Disclosed as Part of SEC’s Climate Rule: Corporate climate plans rely heavily on offsets, which may be giving companies the permission to pollute without compensating for the damages

Grist, October 27, 2021 - California is banking on forests to reduce emissions. What happens when they go up in smoke?: How faulty rules and wildfire could unravel California’s climate progress

Financial Times, August 30, 2021 - Carbon offsets: a licence to pollute or a path to net zero emissions?

New York Times, August 23, 2021 - Wildfires are ravaging forests set aside to soak up greenhouse gases

Marketplace, August 17, 2021 - Emissions offsets ease travel guilt, but do they reduce carbon footprints?

Financial Times, August 2, 2021 - US forest fires threaten carbon offsets as company-linked trees burn

Politico, July 27, 2021 - Wildfires rage and a tool to combat climate change goes up in smoke

CNN, July 22, 2021 - Bootleg Fire is burning up carbon offsets

More news items can be found at this link

Team 

Leadership  

Barbara Haya, PhD
Project Director
 

 

 

 
Research Affiliates  
Kelsey Alford-Jones
PhD Candidate
Energy & Resources

Annelise Gill-Wiehl
PhD Candidate
Energy & Resources

   

Elliot Carleton
Masters Student
Energy & Resources

Marie Hogan
Research Affliate 
Post-graduate BA in Economics
   

Jason Meggs, MCP, MPH
Research Affiliate

Jeffrey Moridani
Masters Student
Development Practice

   
Van Nguyen
Research Affiliate
 

 

 
   
   

Voluntary Registry Offsets Database & Market Tracking Team

   

Aline Abayo
Database Developer
Graduate Student Researcher
Energy & Resources

Ivy So
Research & Data Analyst
Post-graduate
BS in Resource Management

Micah Elias
PhD Candidate
Energy & Resources

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sign Up for Updates

 

We are grateful for support from Steve Newman and Calvin French-Owen.

We gratefully welcome donations to support our ongoing work. Please note that your tax deductable gift is for the "Berkeley Carbon Trading Project, fund# 45162". Please also email Barbara Haya (bhaya@berkeley.edu) so we can watch out for the donation.

Donate