Tuesday, October 24, 2023
In a recent
A Blast from the Past?
Apple's announcement feels like a journey back in time. Claims like "carbon neutrality" and "offsetting" were all the rage a few years ago. However, the narrative has since evolved, with many organizations opting for more transparent and accurate alternatives. It's somewhat disheartening to see Apple, a tech behemoth, not keeping pace with this shift. For a more in-depth look, the Compensate Foundation's
The Voluntary Carbon Market (VCM) Controversy
The VCM has been under the microscope for its questionable impact on the climate. It's rather surprising that Apple seems to be turning a blind eye to the criticisms surrounding carbon offsets. A revealing
EU's Stance on Misleading Advertisements
With its vast European market, Apple should be more attuned to the EU's policies. The EU has recently taken a firm stance against misleading environmental claims, especially those based on emissions offsetting schemes. While this policy isn't flawless, it's undoubtedly a move towards transparency and accountability, as highlighted in this Compensate Foundation
The Timber Plantation Dilemma
Some of the credits Apple leans on are sourced from contentious timber plantation projects. As highlighted in a Financial Times article, these projects have inherent systemic flaws. Trees from such initiatives are often harvested within a decade, leading to the rapid release of stored carbon.
Questionable Financial Additionality
Many of these timber projects are spearheaded by logging or timber companies. The primary objective? Harvesting trees upon maturity. With their clear business models, such projects pose significant challenges regarding their financial additionality.
The Broader Impact of Plantation Projects
What about double claiming?
When making counterbalancing or offset claims, it is imperative to prevent any instances of double claiming. Can Apple confirm that the credits it utilizes are not concurrently claimed by the host country of the project? It's possible that Apple might be leveraging older credit vintages; however, the availability of these is rapidly diminishing in the market. How does Apple plan to guarantee that the host country implements corresponding adjustments for credits post-2021?
Given the ongoing debates around the VCM and the inherent issues with counterbalancing claims, Apple's recent stance raises eyebrows. It doesn’t seem in tune with the recent developments regarding corporate climate claims. From the point of view of consumers, it is also wildly misleading. Apple can and should do much better than this.
Niklas Kaskeala Chairman Compensate Foundation