There's a dirty secret in the carbon offset industry.

Two major problems

Carbon offsets are an innovative funding mechanism, enabling anyone to support high impact climate solutions around the world that would otherwise not exist, due to their unprofitability.

Unfortunately the industry is plagued with glaring problems that require radical solutions to make sure things are done right.

Greenwashing

Large companies greenwash thier dirty business practices.

Companies engage in greenwashing when they attempt to portray themselves as more environmentally friendly than they actually are.

  • Exaggerated Claims: Overstating the environmental benefits of a product or service, often without providing evidence or context.
  • Cherry-picking Data: Highlighting positive environmental efforts while downplaying or ignoring negative impacts.
  • Irrelevant & Misleading information: Promoting a single eco-friendly aspect of a product or service to distract from its overall environmental impact.
  • Vague Language: Using ambiguous terms that sound environmentally friendly but are difficult to substantiate or verify.
  • Lack of Transparency: Failing to disclose relevant information about environmental practices, impacts, or certifications.
False claims

85% of carbon offset projects don't have the impact they promise.

Research suggests that a significant portion of carbon offset projects may not deliver the environmental benefits they promise.

  • Additionality: Some projects may not be truly additional, meaning they would have happened anyway without the offset funding.
  • Permanence: Carbon captured or avoided by a project may be released back into the atmosphere in the future, reducing the long-term impact of their offsets.
  • Verification: Monitoring and verifying the actual carbon savings of a project can be challenging.
  • Double Counting: In some cases, carbon credits may be sold multiple times, leading to a discrepancy between the claimed and actual impact.
  • Mismatched Timeframes: The timeframe over which carbon savings are claimed may not align with the actual lifespan of the project, leading to overestimations.

Our projects are audited by:

Nutrala understands the issues we face

We contiuosly eveluate our project partners

Every project partner we source passes through a rigorous verification system to ensure its authenticity. We triple check the data, validate the science, and require consistent updates on all operational details to unsure our members' funds are having a real, and quantifiable impact.

We take transparency seriously, and maintain high standards when it comes to the credits and offsets we purchase.

In-house certification

3 stage Validation process

Every project partner goes through a 3 stage validation process

Stage 1

Integration icon

pre-Screening

We research promising projects and collect as much public data as possible.

Then we discuss with industry experts and advisors, to asses potential candidates.
Integration icon

Analysis

We study key elements about the projects reporting and measurement standards.

Then we review scientific literature to fully understand how the project works.

Stage 2

Integration icon

vetting

We evaluate permanence and risk of reversal, additionality, past performance, and accuracy of measurements, as well as their overall impact to determine viability.

Stage 3

Integration icon

Due-diligence

Once a project has passed through the vetting stage we do a final review of all the information gathered to find potential discrepancies whilst still communicating with outside experts.
Integration icon

CONTINUOUS audits

We continuously monitor our project partners' performance and ensure the project is maintaining it's effectiveness so we can make sure the continue to meet the standards we expect in order to continue our support funding.
Learn more about our projects

The problems we see today will continue unless something is done to stop it

greenwashing must end
so real change can begin.

Greenwashing is a deceptive marketing tactic used to portray a company as environmentally friendly or sustainable, even when their actual business practices and operations are environmentally harmful or unsustainable.

It is often used to improve public perception, attract environmentally conscious consumers, and deflect criticism or scrutiny away from the damage they cause.

Essentially, greenwashing allows companies to present a façade of environmental responsibility while continuing to prioritize profits over sustainability and genuine environmental protection.

Funding climate solutions is a commendable endeavour, but major emitters must make a concise effort to resolve the source of their emissions, and move toward environmentally sustainable alternatives. Simply trying to buy their way out of accountability through carbon offsets is not the answer, in order to truly address the climate crisis, radical transformations must be made from within their operations. Carbon offsets are merely a temporary bandage, not a sustainable long-term solution that permits these companies to continue polluting.

Consumers are becoming climate conscious

67%

67% of consumers consider the use of sustainable materials an important purchasing factor.

- McKinsey & Company
77%

77% of consumers would stop buying a product if they discovered it was being greenwashed.

- NielsenIQ
68%

68% of green claims did not have supporting evidence readily available to consumers.

- CPRC

Carbon offset projects need more oversight and independant verification.

It is estimated that up to 85% of carbon offset projects don’t have the impact they promise. Determining the effectiveness of carbon offset projects is often difficult due to the lack of standardized metrics and verification processes, transparency is a key issue and unfortunately the lack of regulation has lead to a system full of abuse and fraud.

Learn more about carbon offsets

For an offset project to be effective, it must be additional, meaning that the emissions reductions or removals would not have occurred without offset funding. However, some projects claim offsets on carbon actions that may have happened anyway, even without offset funding, making their emissions reductions misleading.

In some cases, carbon credits from a project may be sold multiple times, leading to a situation where the same emissions reductions are claimed by multiple parties. This can inflate the perceived impact of offset projects and mislead consumers.

However, there are legitimate projects that require critical funding.



Carbon offsets play an important role in addressing the climate crisis by providing funding for projects that reduce or remove greenhouse gas emissions.

Many legitimate projects are not profitable on their own, they require funding from carbon offsets to survive. These projects typically fall into these categories:

1. Environmental Conservation and Restoration: Projects focused on preserving ecosystems, restoring degraded land, or protecting biodiversity may not generate revenue but provide significant environmental benefits. For example, a project to protect a tropical rainforest may not be financially viable without external funding, yet it plays a crucial role in sequestering carbon and preserving biodiversity.

2. Soil Carbon Sequestration: Practices like no-till farming, cover cropping, and agroforestry increase the carbon content in soils to lock them away from entering the atmosphere while also providing flood protection, water purification, while increasing the soil health and leading to enhanced diversification of fauna and habitat. Wetland restoration is complex and expensive, requiring continuous management and oversite, farmers and land managers often choose not to practice soil carbon sequestration due to its unprofitability

3. Clean Energy Access and Infrastructure: Projects such as small-scale solar, wind, and biogas installations in remote or impoverished areas, reduce reliance on fossil fuels, provide clean energy access, and improves public health by reducing indoor air pollution from traditional biomass cooking. Initial setup costs are high, and these projects often lack immediate profitability due to the low payment capacity of local populations.

4. Methane Capture from Landfills: Capturing and utilizing methane emissions from landfills to generate energy requires significant investment in infrastructure and technology, with delayed returns on investment, but this process has the remarkable ability to reduce potent greenhouse gas emissions while generating renewable energy.

5. Cookstove Projects: Distributing efficient cookstoves to reduce deforestation and indoor air pollution improves health outcomes, reduces carbon emissions, and lowers fuelwood consumption. The upfront cost of manufacturing and distributing cookstoves is high, and the financial return is minimal.

Funding from carbon offsets can make these projects financially viable by providing a source of revenue which offsets their operational costs. This funding model incentivizes the development of projects that have significant environmental and social benefits but may not attract traditional investment due to their lack of profitability.

Here at Nutrala we believe making carbon offsets easy and accessible to anyone is a major step in the fight against climate change, which will have a direct impact on the world today, and lasting benefits for every future generation that comes after us. By joining Nutrala you help increase our impact, and collectively, we can make a massive difference together.

Get started