carbon neutral beer.......say what?

In our researching of sustainable alcohol we came across a number of terms used by large companies (and their marketing departments) to sell their drinks as green. So how much of this is green-washing and how much is actually positive stuff done to reduce their impact on the environment? Here we will explain a few of the terms thrown around, and discuss the pros & cons………….

100% carbon offset beer – essentially this means they have calculated the greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the production of their beer and purchased a matching amount of “certified carbon offsets”. This means they have invested in projects that reduce ghg emissions or carbon sequestration projects - such as renewable energy, planting trees, energy efficiency, capture of methane projects etc etc. The main criticism of this method is that it means companies don’t have to change their behaviour – they can just buy the offsets. So if a company has talked about reducing their carbon emissions – via energy efficiency, changing raw materials, using recyled materials & packing, sourcing locally etc etc – and then with the carbon emissions they cannot eliminate they then offset, then we might take their efforts seriously!

Also beware the general claims as the carbon offset products are largely unregulated in Australia. So look for an “accredited scheme” such as those with the AGO Greenhouse Friendly stamp: http://www.climatechange.gov.au/greenhousefriendly/index.html

A good website to find out more is the joint website of RMIT & the EPA at: http://www.carbonoffsetguide.com.au/

Carbon Neutral – essentially is the same as 100% carbon offsets. Again a business calculates their carbon emissions and then buys “offsets” equal to their emissions, thereby ‘netralising’ their carbon. There are loads of companies that offer assistance in becoming carbon neutral, and they essentially just by the offsets from projects such as renewable energy, or planting trees etc etc. so once again you are paying someone to to compensate for the greenhouse gas emissions you cause.

So if offsetting & becoming carbon neutral is all the rage, which schemes are the best???


Planting trees
Good:
• great for biodiversity and the health of the land (as long as it is native trees!!)
• often farmers get to make money from these schemes
Bad
• trees take up to 100 years to ‘absorb’ the amount of carbon required – not quick enough for the world!!!
• if the trees burn down, are cut down, or die before they are meant to the offsets haven’t worked – good offset companies have a guarantee the trees will be replanted if

Energy Efficiency projects & Renewable energyGood:
• the best of the bunch – creates positive change in our energy use
• develops the green energy industry & reduces energy use
• is instant – as you emit the carbon, the green energy should be instantly putting green electricity back into the grid (ditto with energy efficiency)
• more permanent solution
Bad
• Have to makes sure it is 100% accredited Greenpower as there are a lot of unscrupulous energy companies selling ‘old hydro’ as green energy


Methane diversion
Methane is 20 times more ghg intensive than carbon, so any scheme which funds the capture and burning of methane to generate electricity is good. But you have to be sure the methane project isn’t helping to support exisiting evil practices – ie the common methane collection projects include:
- coal seam gas – methane captured when mining coal – the coal that causes the problem in the first place!!!!!!!
- methane from landfill – maybe we should be reducing our landfill
- methane from intensive farmed piggerys etc –we shouldn’t be creating this waste in the first place, and any scheme that supports this barbaric practice isn’t environmentally friendly in the first place!!

In Summary offsetting and becoming carbon neutral are trendy terms but we should be
1. Reduce emissions first
2. Buy renewable energy via green power
3. Then offset the rest making sure you ask the following questions of the offset provider:

 is it a cure or a prevention ie renewable energy & ee are preventing
 does the offset have any negative side effects (eg are the trees local or introduced species, nuclear power)
 make sure the way they calculate the offsets are to a international or accepted standard – there is a lot of variety in they way firms calculate their offsets
 is the offset provider accredited – or at least independently audited