#net-zero

Horizon House, Syros, Greece

Excerpt from this story from Treehugger:

What Is Net-Zero?

Net-zero is a scenario in which human-caused greenhouse gas emissions are reduced as much as possible, with those that remain being balanced out by the removal of greenhouse gas emissions from the atmosphere.

The concept of net-zero has troubled us at Treehugger for some time. We first discussed it in terms of architecture and building, where, according to the International Living Future Institute's definition, "One hundred percent of the project's energy needs being supplied by onsite renewable energy on a net annual basis." But in our post, "The Grid is Not a Bank," I quoted Passivhaus architect Bronwyn Barry, who wrote, "The reality is that the grid does not have the capacity to store all excess energy generated in summer, so buildings employing this 'fuzzy math' still require that the grid supply their winter deficit."

Treehugger contributor Sami Grover has also asked: Is net-zero a fantasy? He discussed pledges from countries, cities, and companies, noting that "the very idea of net-zero has become a problematic excuse for inaction." The problem comes in the second half of our definition [above].

How are these greenhouse gas emissions being removed? Is anyone actually doing it at scale? Or is it all just a dangerous distraction? Some big hitters are now questioning the concept.

The most interesting is a new and important website, Climate Uncensored, set up recently by Dan Calverley and Kevin Anderson, both formerly with the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research. In a recent post, they note that the concept of net-zero started with buildings and apparently got co-opted.

Got some carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions you have to get rid of? Plant some trees or build a big machine to suck them out of the air. Both seem a stretch given the amount of CO2 we are emitting, but they note: "What were once considered fringe policies for their riskiness and highly-speculative nature are now a mainstay of the mitigation scenario and policy landscape, despite the continuing lack of evidence that they can be scaled up in time."

“Two Living Buildings on one campus, built by one local construction team.  A first for the planet, in more ways than one.“

PowerHYDE (billionBricks Homes), 

These solar homes are aiming to help solve both the global housing and climate crises with one design. 

The houses produce their energy, harvest 100% of the rainwater, clean their sewage, and also have the potential to grow their own food!

Math Jalgaon village, Ambad Tehsil of Jalna district, Maharashtra, India

Excerpt from this story from EcoWatch:

In their bid to reach net-zero by a certain date, many companies are buying carbon offsets to compensate for their greenhouse gas emissions by funding activities that are supposed to remove an equivalent amount of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

But UK climate advisory group the Climate Change Committee issued a report Thursday warning that the current offset system is doing more harm than good when it comes to the overall reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.

“Businesses want to do the right thing and it’s heartening to see so many firms aiming for early Net Zero dates,” Climate Change Committee Chief Executive Chris Stark said in a press release announcing the report. ‘But poor-quality offsets are crowding out high-integrity ones. Businesses face confusion over the right approach to take.”

Carbon offsetting is a process whereby a company will buy a carbon credit by funding a project that removes carbon dioxide from the atmosphere in some way. The credit will then count against the purchaser’s actual emissions when they calculate their net climate impact.

This mechanism has become hugely popular as more companies make net-zero emissions pledges, and the voluntary carbon market (VCM) tripled in value between 2020 and 2021 to reach $2 billion.

However, there is a flaw in this strategy. For one thing, it can make it too easy for companies to simply purchase carbon credits and spend less effort on reducing their emissions. This is exacerbated by the fact that carbon credits can be as cheap as less than $4 tonne of carbon removed, as Reuters noted.

Another problem is that not all credits purchased are of equal value or actually remove the carbon they say they will.

UK carriers have delivered a standout performance in global airline efficiency rankings, with TUI Airways (BY/TOM) and Virgin Atlantic (VS/VIR) both featuring prominently in Cirium’s 2025 EmeraldSky Annual Review. The report, published by aviation analytics firm Cirium, ranks the world’s 100 largest airlines based on CO₂ emissions per available seat kilometre (ASK), highlighting how operational…