Why Carbon Removal?

Real net zero requires

Carbon Removal

Fact 01

Avoidance offsets have been called out for having no, and in some cases detrimental, impact on the environment.

Fact 02

More than 90% of credits from the leading carbon standard’s rainforest protection scheme – among the most commonly used by companies – are likely to be “phantom credits” and do not represent genuine carbon reductions.

Fact 03

The evidence is clear. The use of both reduction strategies and carbon removal are necessary to reach net zero by 2050.

Carbon Removal versus Carbon Avoidance

Carbon Removal

Carbon removal methods actively remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, resulting in negative emissions when making footprint calculations. The different types of carbon removal that exist today can be nature-based, technological, or consist of hybrid solutions.

Carbon Avoidance

Methods within this category avoid the emission of greenhouse gases that would otherwise contribute to climate change. The most common forms of avoidance are renewable energy projects, such as wind and solar, as well as energy-saving activities such as providing clean cookstoves or boilers.
These methods result in a net reduction in the amount of CO₂ being emitted in the future. 


Long term impact

The majority of carbon removal methods have a permanence of at least 100 years which targets the negative externalities of existing emissions.


Fails to address existing emissions

Emissions released impact the climate for tens to hundreds of years. Using avoidance credits does nothing to address this challenge.



Removal methods are evidently equipped with proof that the commercialisation of their credits would not have happened otherwise (e.g. Direct air capture).


Lacking proof of additionality

Avoidance methods lack impact and ROI as many projects would have happened otherwise without the commercialisation of their credits.


In line with supranational institutions and expected regulations

SBTi currently requires the use of long-term removal to support net zero claims.


Not in line with upcoming regulation

Based on the expected direction of regulations, avoidance credits will not fulfill claims of carbon neutrality and net zero (e.g. EU Certification Framework).

The business case for Carbon Removal

First mover advantage

Secure access today and tomorrow

Carbon removal supply is scarce today, a challenge that will be exponentially harder for companies to overcome as demand continues to explode (Bloomberg).

Build knowledge base and establish supplier knowledge

Understanding the nascent carbon removal market and establishing early supplier relations are keys to success in the era of Sustainability (BeZero Carbon).

    Climate leader


    • 67% more employees willing to apply and 68% more likely to accept job offers (IBM).
    • 65% said they would be more likely to work for a company with robust environmental policies (Forbes).


    A recent survey of over 1,000 US adults revealed striking evidence that two-thirds (66%) are willing to pay more for sustainable products. (Sustainable Brands). In addition, companies are increasingly including carbon in RFPs as a measure to decrease their own footprint.