Net Zero vs Carbon Neutral: Key Differences Explained

Net zero and carbon neutral are the two most widely used terms in corporate climate communication, and they are also the two most consistently confused. Although both describe a state in which an organization’s climate impact is balanced or neutralized, they operate on fundamentally different principles, cover different gases, require different levels of emissions reduction, and are governed by different standards. Understanding the distinction between net zero and carbon neutral is essential for any organization seeking to set credible climate commitments, avoid greenwashing allegations, and meet the expectations of regulators, investors, and clients ^[1]. This article explains each concept in detail, compares them across the dimensions that matter most to businesses, and outlines how they apply in the audiovisual and live events sector.

Two Terms, Two Standards: The Essential Distinction

The core difference between net zero and carbon neutral lies in what is required before an organization can claim to have achieved its goal.

Carbon neutral means that an organization has balanced its carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by funding an equivalent volume of carbon removals or reductions elsewhere, typically through the purchase of carbon credits. A company can claim carbon neutrality without having significantly reduced its own operational emissions, as long as its remaining footprint is matched by verified offset projects.

Net zero means that an organization has reduced its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions across all scopes to a level consistent with climate science, and has neutralized any remaining residual emissions through permanent carbon removal. Under the Science Based Targets initiative’s Corporate Net-Zero Standard, net zero requires reducing emissions by at least 90% compared to the base year before any permanent removals can be counted ^[2].

In practical terms: carbon neutral is achievable through offsetting without deep operational change, while net zero requires genuine structural decarbonization across the full value chain. This distinction has become increasingly important as regulators and standards bodies tighten their scrutiny of climate claims.

What Carbon Neutral Means (and How It Works)

A carbon neutral claim is typically built on three steps: measuring the organization’s carbon footprint (usually Scope 1 and 2, sometimes partial Scope 3), reducing emissions where feasible, and offsetting the remaining balance through certified carbon credit projects such as reforestation, avoided deforestation, or methane capture.

The governing standard: ISO 14068

Until recently, the primary standard governing carbon neutrality claims was PAS 2060, published by the British Standards Institution. PAS 2060 required organizations to document their footprint, publish a Carbon Footprint Management Plan, and verify their offsetting through recognized registries. In January 2025, PAS 2060 was superseded by ISO 14068-1, a more rigorous international standard that mandates thirteen requirements compared to PAS 2060’s five ^[3]. ISO 14068 places a stronger emphasis on emissions reduction before offsetting and imposes stricter criteria for the quality of carbon credits used to neutralize residual emissions.

Scope coverage

Carbon neutral claims have historically focused on CO2 emissions and typically cover Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions, sometimes with partial Scope 3 inclusion. This narrower scope is one of the primary reasons carbon neutral claims attract scrutiny: an organization that offsets its direct and energy-related emissions while leaving a large Scope 3 footprint unaddressed is not making a meaningful contribution to overall climate stabilization ^[4].

The role of carbon offsets

Not all carbon credits carry the same environmental value. High-quality offsets are characterized by additionality (the emission reduction would not have happened without the project), permanence (the carbon sequestration lasts indefinitely), and independent verification (typically through standards such as Gold Standard or Verified Carbon Standard). ISO 14068 includes detailed provisions on offset quality, reflecting growing regulatory concern about the integrity of the voluntary carbon market.

What Net Zero Means (and What It Requires)

Net zero is a more ambitious and more science-grounded commitment. Its defining characteristic is that the primary mechanism for achieving it is emissions reduction, not offsetting. The carbon credits used in a net-zero framework are permanent removals (such as direct air capture or biochar), not the avoided-emissions offsets that dominate the voluntary carbon market.

The SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard

The most widely recognized framework for corporate net-zero commitments is the Science Based Targets initiative’s Corporate Net-Zero Standard. Under this standard, reaching net zero requires ^[2]:

• A near-term target aligned with 1.5 degrees C pathways for Scopes 1 and 2, validated by SBTi before net-zero targets can be set
• A long-term net-zero target covering all three emission scopes, to be achieved by 2050 at the latest
• A minimum 90% absolute reduction in GHG emissions across all scopes compared to the base year
• Neutralization of residual emissions (the remaining 10% or less) through permanent carbon removal only

Scope coverage and greenhouse gases

Unlike carbon neutrality, which tends to focus on CO2 and operational emissions, net zero under recognized frameworks covers all greenhouse gases (CO2, CH4, N2O, fluorinated gases) and all three emission scopes. This full-value-chain approach is what gives net zero its scientific credibility: it requires addressing the emissions that are often largest and most challenging, including those embedded in supply chains, purchased goods, and business travel ^[5].

Net Zero vs Carbon Neutral: A Detailed Comparison

The following comparison table sets out the key differences across the dimensions most relevant to organizations developing or communicating a climate commitment.

Which Standard Should Your Organization Target?

Carbon neutral and net zero are not mutually exclusive: many organizations pursue carbon neutrality as an interim milestone on the path to net zero. The right starting point depends on the organization’s current emission profile, measurement maturity, operational capacity, and timeline.

Carbon neutral as a credible first step

For organizations that have measured their footprint and implemented the most accessible reduction levers, ISO 14068 carbon neutrality certification provides a recognized, externally verified claim that can be communicated to stakeholders while longer-term decarbonization work continues. It is particularly relevant for project-based claims (for instance, a single certified carbon-neutral film production) where the full corporate net-zero journey has not yet been completed at the organizational level ^[6].

Net zero as the science-aligned target

For organizations seeking long-term credibility with investors, major clients, and regulators, net zero under a recognized framework such as the SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard is the appropriate goal. It requires a longer preparation period (full GHG inventory across all scopes, near-term target validation before net-zero targets can be set), but it provides a far stronger foundation for climate leadership claims and is increasingly the standard expected by institutional investors and large corporate buyers. TheGreenShot’s guide on setting Science Based Targets details the SBTi validation process in full.

The greenwashing risk of weak carbon neutral claims

Regulatory and reputational risk is highest when carbon neutral claims are made on the basis of low-quality offsets, narrow emission scope coverage, or without a credible plan to reduce actual emissions. The EU Green Claims Directive, currently moving through legislative adoption, will require substantiation of environmental claims including carbon neutral statements, effectively raising the bar for what constitutes a legally defensible climate communication. Organizations that invest now in robust measurement and genuine emissions reduction programs are better positioned to maintain compliant claims as this regulatory environment tightens.

Net Zero and Carbon Neutral in the Audiovisual and Events Sector

The audiovisual and live events sector has seen growing adoption of both carbon neutral and net-zero commitments, driven by broadcaster requirements, funding conditions, and the increasing prominence of sustainability as a competitive factor in talent and client relationships.

Carbon neutral productions and studios

Several notable examples demonstrate that carbon neutral certification at the production level is both achievable and increasingly expected. Bavaria Film, based in Germany, is recognized as the first carbon neutral film studio in the world. NBCUniversal has published a commitment to achieve carbon neutrality across its global Scope 1 and 2 operations. In the UK, the sector’s first carbon-neutral virtual production film was completed using a combination of on-location efficiency measures and verified offsetting ^[7]. BBC Studios has had an ambitious carbon action plan in place under the albert certification framework since 2020, covering all of its productions.

Net zero commitments from major broadcasters and studios

At the corporate level, several of the sector’s largest organizations have moved beyond carbon neutrality to net-zero commitments. Disney’s net-zero targets have been validated by SBTi, covering direct operations and the value chain. Netflix has set a 45% internal emissions reduction target aligned with science-based pathways as part of its broader net-zero strategy. The distinction between these two levels of ambition is becoming increasingly visible to commissioners, funders, and audiences: a net-zero commitment backed by SBTi validation carries significantly more credibility than a carbon neutral claim based primarily on offset purchases.

Practical implications for production companies and event organizers

For independent production companies and event organizers, the most pragmatic approach is to pursue carbon neutral certification at the production or event level (using Albert, Carbon’Clap, or ISO 14068 as the governing framework) while simultaneously building the measurement infrastructure needed for a corporate-level net-zero commitment. This means establishing a reliable per-project carbon baseline, implementing the highest-impact reduction levers, and using only high-quality verified offsets for residual emissions. A consistent per-project approach also generates the multi-year data needed to set a credible corporate-level net-zero target aligned with SBTi requirements.

GreenPro by TheGreenShot automates the carbon measurement process for audiovisual and event productions, applying Albert, Carbon’Clap, and GHG Protocol methodologies to generate certified per-project carbon reports. These reports serve as the evidential foundation for both production-level carbon neutral certification and corporate-level net-zero target-setting. The range of carbon calculators available for the audiovisual sector also illustrates the different methodological approaches organizations can adopt depending on their reporting requirements.

Conclusion

Net zero and carbon neutral describe different levels of climate ambition, governed by different standards, and achieved through fundamentally different mechanisms. Carbon neutrality, now governed by ISO 14068, is an achievable first milestone for organizations that have measured their footprint and offset their remaining emissions with verified, high-quality credits. Net zero, under the SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard, is the science-aligned long-term goal, requiring at least a 90% absolute emissions reduction across all scopes before any permanent removal credits are applied. For organizations in the audiovisual and events sector, the most credible path combines production-level carbon neutral certification in the near term with a corporate-level net-zero trajectory grounded in validated science-based targets. As regulatory scrutiny of climate claims continues to intensify, the distinction between these two standards will become an increasingly important factor in how organizations are perceived by commissioners, investors, and audiences. Building robust carbon measurement practices across all emission scopes is the foundational step that enables both claims to be made with confidence and defended with evidence.

FAQ

Go further with TheGreenShot