The Flaws in Corporate Commitments to Achieve Net-Zero Emissions
Over 5,200 companies have committed to achieving net-zero emissions by 2050, including global giants like Apple, Zurich Insurance, P&G, and General Motors. While these corporate pledges aim to offset emissions through initiatives such as reforestation, experts argue that such commitments are fundamentally flawed and might even undermine global climate goals.
The critical issue is that the only “net-zero” target that truly matters is one at the global level. The Earth’s carbon cycle—how carbon moves in and out of the atmosphere—determines actual net-zero emissions, and this scale cannot be replicated by individual companies. As Carbone 4, a French consultancy, argues, the concept of a carbon-neutral company is “fundamentally dubious.”
In fact, major environmental bodies, including the French government and the United Nations, have raised concerns about the validity of corporate net-zero claims. ADEME, France’s Agency for Ecological Transition, explicitly advises against any company claiming to be “carbon neutral,” and a UN expert group is examining the integrity of non-national net-zero pledges.
Carbone 4 provides several reasons for its scepticism, primarily focused on carbon “offsets”—credits that companies purchase to claim emission reductions via external projects. While these actions may improve a company’s appearance on paper, Carbone 4 stresses that such offsets should not be included in a company’s emissions accounting. Instead, the consultancy recommends companies separate their climate actions into three categories: emissions reductions, avoided emissions, and financing for carbon removal.
This approach highlights a key flaw in corporate net-zero strategies: the use of offsets can obscure the true emissions levels of companies, masking their actual environmental impact. Furthermore, the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) mandates that companies reduce their emissions by at least 90% before relying on carbon removal projects to address the remaining 10%.
The issue of carbon removal is particularly important at the global level. As Carbone 4 points out, only when CO2 is physically drawn down on a global or regional scale can emissions be neutralised to achieve true “net zero.” Companies that fail to consider this distinction are not only misleading the public but potentially hindering collective progress toward a sustainable future.
This issue is reflected in international climate agreements such as the Paris Agreement, which focuses on national emissions reductions. The Paris Agreement aims for “global net zero,” recognising that this goal can only be achieved through coordinated, global action, not through the efforts of individual entities.
Critics argue that if corporations shifted their perspective from merely meeting individual emissions targets to actively contributing to a global effort, the impact could be profound. However, under the current system, many companies engage in lobbying against effective climate policies, support political candidates who block climate legislation, and avoid accounting for their own emissions in sectors like professional services. These activities are not captured in emissions accounting, yet they undermine the global effort to address climate change.
According to Derik Broekhoff, a senior scientist at the Stockholm Environment Institute, no company can solve the climate crisis in isolation. Companies that are genuinely committed to achieving net-zero emissions must advocate for climate policies that foster a coordinated global transition, supporting efforts at every level of government.
In conclusion, corporate net-zero pledges are often misleading and fall short of addressing the broader systemic issues of climate change. Companies must move beyond superficial offsets and actively engage in global climate initiatives to make a meaningful contribution to the fight against global warming.
