“Carbon offsets” are a means by which businesses, governments and other entities can pay for projects that cut greenhouse gases in order to “cancel out” some of their own emissions.
- In-depth Q&A: Can ‘carbon offsets’ help to tackle climate change?
- Glossary: Carbon Brief’s guide to the terminology of carbon offsets
- Timeline: The 60-year history of carbon offsets
- Infographic: How are carbon offsets supposed to work?
- Mapped: The impacts of carbon-offset projects around the world
- In-depth Q&A: What are ‘biodiversity offsets’?
- Analysis: How some of the world’s largest companies rely on carbon offsets to ‘reach net-zero’
The topic is contentious, as Carbon Brief’s special series on carbon offsetting has revealed.
The week began with an in-depth Q&A exploring the principles underpinning offsetting and explaining when and why problems have emerged.
Carbon Brief also published new analysis examining which companies are relying on offsets to make “net-zero” claims – and mapped where journalists and campaigners have reported cases of offset projects going wrong.
To conclude this week-long series, Carbon Brief hosted a free webinar that asked how carbon offsets can be reformed.
A video of the recording (below) is now available to watch on YouTube.
The webinar featured four panellists, all of whom have considered this question in their professional and personal lives:
- Dr Barbara Haya, director of the Berkeley Carbon Trading Project at the University of California, Berkeley.
- Kaya Axelsson, net zero policy engagement fellow at the University of Oxford.
- Laura George, governance and rights coordinator of the Amerindian Peoples Association.
- Pedro Martins Barata, associate vice president for carbon markets at the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) and co-chair of the expert panel at the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market (ICVCM).
While all four webinar participants saw the need for considerable change in how carbon offset markets work, their views on what needed to happen diverged considerably.
Haya was clear from the outset that, having studied offset quality for over 20 years, she has consistently found evidence that carbon-offset projects are “over-crediting” – namely, they overestimate the amount of emissions they are cutting:
“The level of over-crediting is really significant. We’re not talking 20-30% overcrediting, we’re talking five times, 10 times, 12 times over-crediting…In the end, I will argue that we need to move away from offsets. I don’t see a way to fix this market.”
The panellists discussed different ways in which offsets could be done differently, including a so-called “contribution” approach. This involves entities buying offset credits, but not counting the emissions cuts towards their own targets, meaning climate action could be supported without misleading claims being made.
Axelsson emphasised that, in her view, the money that can flow from offset purchases to “parts of the world that need that financing” is important.
Therefore, she said her focus is more on ensuring that there are high-quality offsets on the market, with more of an emphasis on offsets derived from long-term emissions storage projects. She added:
“You don’t wash your hands of something once you’ve invested. You have to watch and steward and curate it and make sure communities are involved.”
George, whose organisation promotes and advocates for the rights of Indigenous peoples in Guyana, stressed the importance of considering the rights of these groups when considering carbon-offset projects:
“Things like that can work only if we are informed properly and respect is given…Decisions that are made are impacting Indigenous peoples’ rights, our food security, land tenure security and everything else.”
Barata agreed with other speakers that without a strong regulatory framework “you do have a system where it’s everyone for themselves, nobody checks the quality” of offsets. However, he emphasised that change was possible, stating:
“I’m worried about credit quality very much – and that’s why ICVCM has been set up – and we do hope that over the next few months we will be able to change significantly the landscape of carbon credits.”
Over the course of the webinar, panellists also took questions on REDD+ forest protection schemes, new UN carbon markets and who should be responsible for reforming the trade in offsets.
The post Webinar: How can carbon offsets be reformed? appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Climate Change
‘Energy Vampires’: Greenpeace calls for moratorium on data centres as new report reveals frenzied rollout would derail energy transition
SYDNEY, Wednesday 27 May 2026 — A new report from Greenpeace Australia Pacific and independent expert Ketan Joshi reveals how the frenzied rollout of AI data centres in Australia is set to derail the renewable energy transition, entrench gas and turbocharge climate pollution, prompting calls for an urgent moratorium on data centre approvals until appropriate guardrails are in place.
The report, Energy Vampires: the AI data centres draining Australia, reveals the staggering scale of data centre growth in Australia, set to follow a US path of emissions blowout and rising community opposition to the resource-hungry facilities. The report exposes the links between the data centre lobby and the gas industry, who are using data centre growth to justify extracting more gas.
Greenpeace Australia Pacific is calling on the Federal Government to urgently implement a moratorium on the construction and approval of new data centres, until appropriate regulations and safeguards have been put in place to protect the climate and communities.
Key findings:
- Data centres are already failing to cover their own demand with additional renewable energy, and resisting calls to mandate that they do.
- At its peak, Australia’s biggest proposed data centre, the 1GW Mamre Road Data Centre Campus in Western Sydney, will generate annual emissions equivalent to 560,000 petrol cars, or all domestic flights within NSW in 2023.
- There are early signs of a data centre-fuelled gas boom in Australia, including proposals for new on-site gas, as seen in the US.
- Cloud Carrier’s proposed gas-fired data centre in NSW would wipe out the state’s entire projected 2028 emissions cuts.
- Even if only 1 in 4 new Australian data centres were powered by new on-site gas, it would result in 2.8x higher total emissions compared to using grid power.
Joe Rafalowicz, Head of Climate and Energy at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “Australia is completely unprepared for the magnitude of impacts of the AI-driven data centre frenzy. Data centres are being rolled out at a feverish pace, with some of the largest planned for Australia consuming as much energy as Adelaide. The recent federal and state energy minister communique is a positive first step towards regulating the data centre industry, and managing its impact on the energy transition and the communities where they’re being built.
“But we should all be concerned by the extreme lack of scrutiny being applied to the companies leading the data centre charge in Australia and their proposals. Without strong, legislated standards, we risk replicating the disastrous US pattern, where Big Tech corporations have carte blanche to drain energy and water, and build new, polluting gas and diesel-powered plants to fuel their operations. This has seen mounting community opposition that transcends party politics, something we’re beginning to see here in Australia.
“Greenpeace is calling for a moratorium on new data centre approvals and construction until we have clearly defined, enforceable regulations and standards in place to govern this industry — essential if we hope to avoid the alarming outcomes outlined in this report.
“Australia is not a playground for Big Tech corporations. It is time our leaders stepped up and took seriously their role as custodians of our resources and protectors of our society and environment.”
Ketan Joshi, independent report author and climate expert said: “Impatience is not a virtue. The reckless data centre buildout is heaping massive new load onto the grid, meaning renewables have to run harder just to stay in the same spot. Currently data centres increase coal and gas output and delay shutdowns, while plugging polluting gas into data centres does the damage directly instead.
“Unless the data centre industry builds no new fossil fuels and far more new renewables than new demand, we end up worse off. Australia’s gas industry sees a lifeline in an unchecked data centre frenzy, and the feeling seems to be mutual.
“Data centre demand projections keep jabbing upwards each revision, and emissions projections keep getting worse. Everywhere in the world facing this frenzy sees the same trend.
“Data centre moratoria have bipartisan support in countries around the world as the only path to reintroducing careful, considered governance of data centre growth. In the context of an irrational, unjustified panic, a temporary pause brings reason and rationality, along with bringing power to communities.”
-ENDS-
Images and an interview clipreel of Greenpeace spokespeople at the Mamre Road data centre in Western Sydney available here.
Media contacts:
Lucy Keller on 0491 135 308 or lucy.keller@greenpeace.org
Kate O’Callaghan on 0406 231 892 or kate.ocallaghan@greenpeace.org
A new report from Greenpeace Australia Pacific and independent expert Ketan Joshi reveals how the frenzied rollout of AI data centres in Australia is set to derail the renewable energy transition, entrench gas and turbocharge climate pollution, prompting calls for an urgent moratorium on data centre approvals until appropriate guardrails are in place.
The frenzied rollout of AI data centres in Australia is rushing through massive new projects, which will derail Australia’s energy transition unless the government urgently intervenes.
Key findings
- The frenzied rollout of AI data centres in Australia is rushing through massive new projects, which will derail Australia’s energy transition unless the government urgently intervenes. Our conservative assumptions mean this impact is understated, in this analysis.
- Australia’s biggest proposed data centre, the 1GW Mamre Road Data Centre Campus in Western Sydney, will generate peak annual grid emissions equivalent to that produced by 560,000 petrol cars for a year or all domestic flights within NSW in 2023.
- Data centres already fail to cover their own emissions with new renewables and their rollout will dramatically hold back Australia’s energy transition.
- No data centre operator analysed in this report adequately proves their claim of driving Australia’s renewable energy growth. Claims they are doing this through truly “additional” new power purchasing agreements for renewable energy are unsubstantiated.
- There are early signs of a data centre-fuelled gas boom in Australia, which will come with massive, nationally significant climate costs. For example, the Tamboran proposal for the Northern Territory would effectively double the state’s emissions. In NSW, Cloud Carrier’s proposed gas-fired project would wipe out NSW’s entire projected 2028 emissions cuts.
- Even if only 1 in 4 new Australian data centres were powered by new on-site gas, it would result in 2.8x higher total emissions compared to using grid power.
- New analysis shows that on-site gas for data centres globally could fuel emissions that exceed Brazil’s total power grid emissions by 2030.
- Fossil fuel corporations are quietly joining the data centre lobby group as members, and sponsoring and attending technology industry conferences. The two industries are reinforcing each other’s talking points and PR spin.
- Data centre operators do not disclose the customers of an individual facility, the purpose of the computations performed there, or site-specific energy consumption, despite the industry’s defense of its ‘critical infrastructure’ status or claims of transparency. It is a matter of public record that AI is being used for abuse, war and other human rights violations.
- Data centres can be ‘right sized’ through community ownership schemes, well-deployed AI software and strict moratoria to allow for democratic governance of this industry.
This report recommends:
- An urgent moratorium on data centre development until safeguards are legislated
- Binding, legislated standards for AI development, including substantiated claims of additional renewable energy
- Full disclosure of services delivered, emissions, finances and energy use, per project
- Full assessment of compliance with human rights frameworks
Lead author: Ketan Joshi is an independent climate, environment and sustainability expert. He was the lead author on “The AI Climate Hoax”, published with several corporate accountability and environmental groups in 2026, and previously wrote “Windfall: Unlocking a Fossil Free Future” with the University of New South Wales Press. He worked for eight years in Australia’s renewable energy sector (corporate and government), and has worked with European NGOs working on climate communications and corporate accountability.
Valley Link would connect a potential nuclear reactor and fossil fueled-powered plants to serve suburban data centers.
GOOCHLAND, Va.—Deborah Blackburn leaned on her cane in a line to enter the Central High Cultural and Educational Complex, angst-ridden over a giant transmission line proposal for reasons that are common refrains here: It’s all to benefit data centers in Northern Virginia, and it will disrupt the rural character here outside Richmond.
Residents Wrangle Over Transmission Line Proposal for Rural Virginia
‘Energy Vampires’: Greenpeace calls for moratorium on data centres as new report reveals frenzied rollout would derail energy transition
Energy Vampires: the AI data centres draining Australia
NextEra Buys Dominion, China Outpaces Vestas
-
Greenhouse Gases10 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change10 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy7 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases11 months ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测