Carbon Credits for Businesses: Voluntary vs Compliance Markets

More than 10 billion USD has been committed to generating new carbon credits in recent reporting periods, roughly three times the level seen a year earlier ^[1]. For any organisation weighing carbon credits for businesses as part of a climate strategy, that surge signals both opportunity and risk. A carbon credit represents one tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent avoided or removed from the atmosphere, and it can be bought, sold and retired to counterbalance emissions a company cannot yet eliminate. Yet not all credits are created equal, and they trade across two very different systems. This article explains what carbon credits are, how voluntary and compliance markets differ, how companies actually use them, and what the shift toward integrity means for buyers, with a specific focus on the audiovisual and live events sector.

What carbon credits are and how they work

A carbon credit is a tradable certificate that stands for one tonne of CO2 equivalent that has been either avoided (for example, by funding renewable energy that replaces fossil generation) or physically removed (for example, through reforestation or direct air capture). Once a company uses a credit to compensate for its own emissions, that credit is retired, meaning it is permanently cancelled so it cannot be counted twice.

Credits are issued by independent standards bodies such as Verra and Gold Standard, which verify that the underlying project delivers a real, measurable and additional climate benefit. The concept of carbon credits for businesses rests on this chain of verification: a project developer reduces or removes emissions, an accredited verifier confirms the outcome, credits are issued into a registry, and a buyer retires them against a defined footprint. Because the environmental value depends entirely on the quality of that chain, measurement comes first. Companies that map their emissions with a tool such as an automated carbon reporting platform know exactly how many tonnes they need to address before purchasing a single credit.

Voluntary vs compliance markets: the core differences

Carbon credits circulate through two parallel systems that share a unit of account but little else. Compliance markets are created and enforced by governments, which cap emissions for regulated sectors and require covered companies to surrender allowances or face penalties. The European Union Emissions Trading System, California’s cap-and-trade programme and the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative are leading examples. Voluntary markets, by contrast, let any organisation buy credits by choice, typically to support net-zero commitments or to answer stakeholder expectations.

Price is where the gap becomes concrete. Compliance allowances have traded at an average of more than 80 EUR per tonne of CO2 under the EU ETS ^[2], while voluntary credits have ranged widely, from single digits for some nature-based offsets to several hundred euros per tonne for engineered removals ^[2]. High-integrity credits now command a substantial premium over lower-quality alternatives, a spread that reflects growing scrutiny of what a credit actually delivers ^[2].

Aviation illustrates how the two can overlap. Under CORSIA, the United Nations scheme for international flights, airlines must offset growth in emissions using eligible units, and the cost of compliance has climbed toward 1.7 billion USD for a single compliance period ^[6]. Airlines source those units from a defined pool of approved credits ^[5], which shows how a compliance obligation can draw directly on the same project-based supply that feeds the voluntary market.

How businesses buy and use carbon credits

For most companies outside heavily regulated sectors, engagement with carbon credits for businesses happens through the voluntary market. The credible sequence is well established: measure the footprint, reduce emissions as far as operationally possible, and only then use high-quality credits to address the residual that cannot yet be cut. Credits are a complement to reduction, never a substitute for it, and regulators and standard setters increasingly expect claims to reflect that order.

Quality has become the defining issue. The Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market has published ten Core Carbon Principles that set a global benchmark, and credits meeting them earn a CCP label in registries ^[4]. Buyers use that label to screen out weaker credits, because those without it are treated as higher risk by auditors, investors and regulators ^[4]. Demand is concentrating on this higher tier: retirements of credits reached record levels in recent reporting periods even as buyers grew more selective ^[3], and analysts expect the voluntary market to keep expanding at a strong double-digit annual rate ^[1].

Practically, a business builds a portfolio that balances lower-cost avoidance credits with more expensive but durable removals, documents the retirement of each credit, and communicates carefully to avoid overstated claims. Structured measurement underpins the whole exercise, which is why many organisations pair credit purchases with expert sustainability support and a clear reduction roadmap before turning to the market.

Carbon credits for film productions and live events

The audiovisual and live events sector shows how carbon credits fit into a broader decarbonisation strategy rather than replacing one. Among ten major film and television companies analysed, eight cut their scope 1 and scope 2 emissions over a recent two-year window, led by ITV, Netflix and Paramount ^[7]. Netflix has committed to reducing internal emissions by 49 percent from a 2019 baseline, NBCUniversal aims for carbon neutrality across its film productions, and Sony Pictures targets zero environmental impact over the longer term ^[7]. These leaders prioritise measured reductions first and treat credits as a tool for the residual footprint.

Film and television productions

A shoot generates emissions from crew and cast travel, generator fuel, studio energy, set construction and the wider supply chain across decor, costume and post-production. Reliable credit use starts with capturing all of that at the project level, then retiring credits only against the verified balance. Industry initiatives increasingly follow a disciplined framework: assess the footprint of a production, contribute to a verified project, let the credits be retired, and only then make any net-zero claim ^[8]. Producers coordinating complex crews can keep the operational data clean with a dedicated crew scheduling platform, while carbon-specific measurement is handled by GreenPro.

Live events and festivals

Festivals, concerts and corporate events concentrate emissions in on-site power, audience and crew mobility, local suppliers, waste and overnight stays. Because these impacts vary enormously between editions, credits should be sized to each event’s measured footprint rather than to a generic average. Event organisers that combine accurate measurement with local reduction actions can make credible, defensible claims, and TheGreenshot documents comparable work with major productions in its client case studies.

Conclusion

Carbon credits for businesses have matured from a lightly scrutinised add-on into a governed market where quality determines value. The distinction between voluntary and compliance systems matters: one is driven by legal obligation and enforced by penalties, the other by choice and increasingly by integrity standards such as the ICVCM Core Carbon Principles. For companies, the credible path is consistent across both: measure precisely, reduce first, and use verified credits only for the residual footprint. As integrity requirements tighten and demand shifts toward high-quality removals, organisations that build their strategy on solid measurement will be best placed to buy credits that hold up to scrutiny and to make claims that regulators, auditors and audiences can trust.

FAQ

Going further with TheGreenshot