8 Carbon Offsetting
Support
Net Zero Carbon Development Plan
Representation ID: 72086
Received: 20/08/2021
Respondent: Mrs Sarah Stone
Agree that this should be a last resort. Hope that this policy is robust enough to prevent developers finding it worth doing this except in the very few unusual cases.
Agree that this should be a last resort. Hope that this policy is robust enough to prevent developers finding it worth doing this except in the very few unusual cases.
Object
Net Zero Carbon Development Plan
Representation ID: 72107
Received: 10/09/2021
Respondent: Castle Farm Neighbours
Offsetting is a confidence trick; a nice idea endorsed by voodoo science and enthusiasts with an eye for a profit It is a mechanism for unnecessary cost, non-jobs and corruption. Simply enforce zero emmission standards and the "need" for this nonsense is totally avoided.
Offsetting is a confidence trick; a nice idea endorsed by voodoo science and enthusiasts with an eye for a profit It is a mechanism for unnecessary cost, non-jobs and corruption. Simply enforce zero emmission standards and the "need" for this nonsense is totally avoided.
Support
Net Zero Carbon Development Plan
Representation ID: 72144
Received: 13/09/2021
Respondent: Mrs Sidney Syson
Essential alternative where carbon neutral schemes are not viable, but hopefully not used too often.
Essential alternative where carbon neutral schemes are not viable, but hopefully not used too often.
Object
Net Zero Carbon Development Plan
Representation ID: 72156
Received: 12/09/2021
Respondent: Kenilworth All Together Greener
We question whether the Government’s Standard Assessment Procedure will be updated in time and in an appropriate manner to fix its current blind spot in regard to the significant performance gap between design and construction. This is absolutely crucial. If this is not addressed, then how will developers demonstrate compliance with the WDC’s in use standard?
We are also very concerned at the prominence given to offsetting. Offsetting is a very poor substitute for reducing carbon emissions at source and should only be a very last resort.
It is widely recognised that planting trees only removes atmospheric carbon in significant quantities in the longer term. It cannot be used to achieve nearer term targets such as WDC’s and as the global climate crisis requires. Renewable energy generation both on and off site are vastly preferable. We also question the proposed use of the carbon price in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme as a suitable metric. This has a track record of being too low to provide the desired leverage.
Finally, we want to see the document use clear, unequivocal, legally enforceable language (e.g. ‘require’, ‘must’, etc. rather than 'expect', ‘should',). We want it to succeed.
Please see attached.