Airlines Are Abandoning Carbon Offsets. This Is a Misstep.

Editor's note: This column for Dinogo is authored by Emily Nyrop, vice president of climate change solutions at Conservation International.

Air travel is making a comeback. After a three-year pause, global aviation traffic is projected to return to prepandemic levels by June, with U.S. airports preparing for over 4 billion travelers in 2023. Although these flights last only a few hours, their carbon emissions will influence our climate for many decades to come.

The carbon footprint of the airline industry is massive, exceeding that of all but five countries. For example, a one-way flight from New York to Los Angeles emits one metric ton of carbon dioxide per passenger—more than the annual emissions of an average resident of Pakistan, according to the German nonprofit Atmosfair. This issue is unlikely to improve soon, as decarbonizing aircraft presents unique challenges. The lithium batteries suitable for electric cars are too heavy for flight. While hydrogen power shows potential, it remains largely untested. Additionally, biofuels derived from plants or algae are still prohibitively expensive for widespread use.

The reality is that it may take decades before we experience fossil-fuel-free air travel. So, while researchers, businesses, and governments work on new technologies, what can the rest of us do? Reducing flight frequency is one option, and it’s quite effective. However, I’m not unrealistic: having dedicated my career to climate solutions, I acknowledge that traveling by train, bike, or even horse-drawn carriage isn't always feasible. Thankfully, when I must fly, I have a well-established, scientifically backed approach to reduce my impact: carbon credits.

As the world strives for a net-zero future, environmentally conscious individuals and organizations can acquire carbon credits from national and international markets. In some instances, these credits fund the protection of forest areas, mitigating emissions from deforestation, which is the second-leading cause of climate change. In return for preserving carbon-rich forests, communities—often Indigenous or rural, facing economic challenges—receive funds necessary to support conservation initiatives and develop new sustainable livelihoods.

The strongest case for carbon credits lies in their immediacy: these projects provide quick climate benefits, are easily scalable, and cost the buyer approximately $30–$50 per ton of CO2 emitted. (In contrast, experimental carbon capture technologies like direct air capture currently range from $200 to $500 per ton.) The benefits extend beyond climate alone; healthy forests promote biodiversity, help prevent zoonotic pandemics, and enhance food and water security. By assigning a monetary value to these social benefits, carbon markets ensure that trees are valued more alive than dead.

Some skeptics contend that carbon credits primarily favor large corporations, offering them a low-cost “license to pollute.” While I understand this skepticism, it’s not entirely justified. Research indicates that companies purchasing carbon credits typically have more ambitious net-zero targets and invest more in decarbonization than those that don’t. Moreover, high-quality carbon credits can foster redistributive justice, creating opportunities in the world’s most climate-vulnerable communities.

Consider the Chyulu Hills, located in one of East Africa’s most legendary landscapes. This once-vibrant region of Kenya has faced years of persistent drought—sometimes severe enough to decimate 90 percent of livestock. As agricultural revenue dwindled, the temptation to clear nearby forests increased. In 2017, Conservation International launched a credit-generating project in Chyulu Hills in collaboration with local Maasai communities. In just five years, this initiative has generated millions of dollars—funds that supported the community during the pandemic’s impact on ecotourism. This income has also funded salaries for 100 park rangers fighting poaching, scholarships for 500 students along with new educators and classrooms, clean water infrastructure, and beekeeping supplies and training for women historically marginalized in the workforce.

For nearly a decade, airlines have adopted carbon credits, or “offsets,” to partially compensate for emissions that are currently unavoidable. Some airlines let customers buy credits during checkout, while others automatically offset flights at their own expense. Recently, however, airline offset programs have faced significant scrutiny. A report released in October 2022 by Carbon Market Watch found that many of Europe’s largest airlines relied on subpar credits, some costing as little as €5 per ton. These airlines received the results that matched their investment: inadequate implementation, poor monitoring, and disappointing outcomes.

Rather than enhancing vetting procedures, collaborating with credible nonprofits, or adopting third-party auditing from reputable organizations like Verra, several major airlines have completely rejected carbon credits. In December, JetBlue declared that it will stop offsetting domestic flights; instead, the airline plans to invest in sustainable aviation fuel (SAF). EasyJet recently followed suit. While the intent is commendable, the widespread implementation of SAF remains years away. For instance, JetBlue anticipates converting only 10 percent of its fuel by 2030. Although a technological breakthrough could hasten this transition, it's not a certainty—and even with extensive SAF adoption, significant emissions from flying will persist. High-quality offsets serve as a dependable supplement and should, at the very least, be available to passengers on an opt-in basis.

While we can't solely rely on offsets to achieve climate stability, carbon credits provide an immediate and proven method to lessen the environmental impact of travel while also supporting vulnerable communities. Tackling climate change is the challenge of our lifetime—one that demands a comprehensive strategy. Everyday choices in conscious consumption can create significant positive change.