Corporate Carbon Offsetting in Canada: A Business Guide

Key takeaways

1. Under Canada’s federal offset system, one credit represents one tonne of CO₂e reduced or removed, and only projects covered by a federal protocol can generate credits.
2. Funding tree planting and buying carbon credits pay for different things. A business that funds 50,000 trees reports 50,000 trees and doesn’t convert them into tonnes of CO₂e.
3. “Verified” can mean the trees were planted, that they survived or that carbon was measured, so ask what was checked and by whom.
4. Under the Competition Act, a business has to be able to back up an environmental claim, including the overall impression the claim gives.
5. BGPP funds forest restoration with First Nations partners at $1 CAD per tree and doesn’t issue carbon credits.

Carbon offsetting can sound simple: calculate your company’s emissions, pay for an equivalent amount of greenhouse gases to be reduced or removed somewhere else, and account for that reduction against your remaining emissions. In practice, there’s more to it. Not every environmental project generates carbon credits, planting trees isn’t automatically the same thing as purchasing an offset, and Canadian businesses need to be careful about the claims they make after funding either one.

If you’re comparing carbon credits, tree planting and other environmental programs, the useful question isn’t just how much they cost. It’s what you’re actually buying, how the result is measured, and what your business will be able to substantiate afterwards.

What carbon offsetting actually means for a Canadian business

A carbon offset credit represents a measured reduction or removal of greenhouse gas emissions. Under Canada’s federal Greenhouse Gas Offset Credit System, 1 offset credit represents 1 tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO₂e) reduced or removed from the atmosphere. Federal credits are generated by registered projects that meet the requirements of the regulations and an applicable federal offset protocol.

Those requirements matter. Eligible projects have to generate reductions or removals beyond what would have happened under business-as-usual conditions, and the resulting reductions or removals have to be quantified and verified before credits are issued.

That makes purchasing an offset credit different from simply funding an environmental project. If your company needs carbon credits for a specific reporting or climate commitment, you need a program that can provide eligible credits and the documentation behind them. If your objective is to fund forest restoration and report what your contribution put in the ground, direct tree funding can serve a different purpose.

Carbon capture, carbon credits and carbon offsets

These three terms often get used as though they mean the same thing, which makes comparing providers harder than it needs to be.

Carbon capture means taking carbon dioxide out of the air, or stopping it from reaching the air in the first place. In industry the term usually refers to technology that traps CO₂ at a smokestack or pulls it directly from the atmosphere. Trees capture carbon naturally as they grow, storing it in their wood and roots and in the surrounding soil.

A carbon credit is a unit issued by an offset program once a reduction or removal has been quantified and verified under that program’s rules. One credit usually represents 1 tonne of CO₂e.

Carbon offsetting is what happens when a business uses a credit to account for part of its own emissions. The credit is then retired in a registry so it can’t be used again by anyone else.

A project can capture carbon without ever producing a credit, and funding that project doesn’t mean your company’s emissions have been offset.

Start with your own emissions

Most corporate climate frameworks treat offsets as a later step. A business usually begins by measuring its emissions and cutting what it can through energy use, transportation, waste and its supply chain, then looks at credits or project funding for the emissions that are hard to eliminate. Credits and tree funding can sit alongside that work, but neither one replaces it.

Tree planting vs. other offset types

Both can fund environmental work, but they aren’t interchangeable. The key difference is what your business is paying for, how the result is measured, and what you can accurately report afterwards. At a glance:

	Carbon credits	Direct tree planting
What you’re funding	A quantified greenhouse gas reduction or removal	Trees being planted as part of a restoration project
How it’s measured	Tonnes of CO₂e	Trees funded or planted
Verification	Depends on the applicable offset program, standard or registry	Depends on the provider and may include planting records or field assessments
What you receive	Credits associated with the verified reduction or removal	A record of the trees or planting work your contribution funded
Can it be called a carbon offset?	Yes, when the credit meets the requirements of the applicable offset program	Not automatically
BGPP’s model	BGPP does not currently issue carbon credits	$1 CAD funds 1 tree

Trees remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere as they grow, which is why forests are an important part of climate policy in Canada. But planting a tree does not, by itself, generate a carbon credit.

That removal happens slowly. A seedling planted this year stores very little carbon in its first years, and the amount a stand eventually holds depends on the species, the site, how many trees survive and how the forest is managed afterwards. Trees planted today won’t balance out the emissions your business produces this year.

An offset program needs a method for determining what emissions reduction or removal occurred because of the project, compared with what would otherwise have happened. It also needs rules for quantification, monitoring and verification. Under Canada’s federal system, only eligible activities covered by a published federal offset protocol can generate federal offset credits.

That distinction is particularly important when comparing tree-planting organizations. Some forestry projects may be structured to generate carbon credits, while others are designed to restore forests without issuing credits.

Blue Green Planet Project falls into the second category. BGPP funds forest restoration carried out with First Nations partners in Canada, but its current planting program does not issue carbon credits. For the BGPP-supported planting funded through Natural Resources Canada, BGPP has confirmed that those trees cannot be claimed as carbon credits.

A business funding 50,000 trees through BGPP can therefore report that it funded 50,000 trees. It should not automatically convert those trees into a corresponding number of carbon offsets or tonnes of CO₂e.

Other types of offset projects

Tree planting is one of several project types that can be structured to generate carbon credits. The common ones work in different ways:

• Forest conservation protects existing forest so the carbon already stored in its trees and soil stays there. Credits depend on showing the forest would otherwise have been cleared or degraded.
• Renewable energy projects reduce emissions by replacing electricity generated from fossil fuels. Whether they qualify for credits depends on the methodology and on evidence that the project wouldn’t have gone ahead anyway.
• Methane capture collects methane from landfills, farms or industrial sites before it reaches the atmosphere, then burns it or uses it for energy.

Each type has its own measurement methods and risks. If a provider is selling credits, ask which kind of project they come from as well as which standard they were issued under.

When might a business choose each approach?

The right approach depends on what your organization is trying to accomplish. If your company needs a quantified greenhouse gas reduction or removal for a specific emissions or reporting program, carbon credits may be relevant. In that case, the standard, methodology, verification process and documentation behind the credit all matter.

Direct tree planting serves a different purpose. A business might choose to fund planting because it wants to support forest restoration, wildfire recovery or a specific project and report on the tangible work its contribution funded. The result is easier to describe in concrete terms, such as the number of trees funded, where they were planted and who carried out the work, but those figures shouldn’t be presented as carbon offsets unless the project actually generates eligible credits.

Some organizations may choose to do both. The important part is keeping the claims attached to each activity separate and making sure your reporting reflects what was actually measured.

How offsets get verified

“Verified” is a useful word to question when comparing providers because it can refer to very different things. For a federal carbon credit, verification concerns the greenhouse gas reductions or removals claimed by the project and whether they were monitored and quantified according to the applicable protocol.

For a tree-planting program, verification might instead confirm that trees were planted, where the planting happened, or how a site performed after planting. Those can be valuable checks, but they aren’t the same as verifying a quantity of carbon removed from the atmosphere.

BGPP-supported planting, for example, is assessed in the field by independent foresters. That provides an independent check on the planting work, but it does not turn those trees into carbon credits or provide a verified CO₂e figure.

When you see the word “verified,” ask what was actually verified, who did the verification and what methodology or standard sits behind the result. A narrower claim backed by a clear record is more useful than a broader one that’s difficult to substantiate.

What offset programs check before issuing credits

Credit programs differ in their details, but most test a project against the same core principles:

• Additionality: would the reduction or removal have happened without the project? Trees that would have been planted anyway, for example because of a legal obligation to replant, generally don’t qualify.
• Permanence: how long will the carbon stay stored? Forestry projects carry real risk here, since wildfire, insects, disease and drought can release carbon years after planting. Credible forestry protocols require ongoing monitoring and hold back a share of credits as a buffer against those losses.
• Double counting: can more than one party claim the same benefit? Registries exist so that each credit is issued once and retired once. The same principle applies when a project is already supported by public money, so ask whether government funding is involved and who can claim what.

A tree-planting program that doesn’t issue credits won’t be tested against these principles in the same way, but they’re still useful questions to ask about any project you fund.

What does carbon offsetting cost?

There isn’t one standard price for a carbon offset in Canada. Cost varies based on the market, project type, methodology, verification requirements and the specific credit being purchased. Carbon credits are generally sold per tonne of CO₂e, while direct tree-planting programs may instead charge per tree.

That means comparing the sticker price of 2 programs can be misleading if they’re selling different things. BGPP, for example, uses a straightforward funding model: $1 CAD funds 1 tree. That is a per-tree contribution to forest restoration, not the purchase price of a carbon credit.

Start any cost comparison by looking at the unit being sold and what’s included with it. A price per tonne and a price per tree answer different questions.

It also helps to ask what a contribution pays for beyond the unit itself, because two programs with similar prices can include very different things:

• site planning and preparation
• the planting itself
• independent verification or field assessment
• monitoring after planting
• the documentation and reporting your business will receive

A lower price that leaves out monitoring or reporting can leave your team without the records it needs later, when it has to back up what it says about the purchase.

Questions to ask any provider before you commit

You don’t need to become a carbon-market expert to evaluate a provider, but you should be able to get clear answers to a few basic questions.

1. Am I purchasing carbon credits or funding an environmental project?
Get the distinction in writing. If carbon credits are being sold, ask which standard, registry or offset system they come from and how you can verify their issuance.

2. What exactly has been measured?
Trees funded, trees planted, trees still alive after planting and tonnes of CO₂e are different measurements. Ask what each reported number represents, over what period, and how it was calculated.

3. Who verifies the work?
Find out whether verification is independent and what the verifier actually assesses. “Third-party verified” tells you very little without that context.

4. Where does the project happen and who carries it out?
A provider should be able to identify where the work takes place and the organizations responsible for delivering it on the ground.

5. What documentation will we receive?
Ask before you commit. Your sustainability, finance and marketing teams should know what records will be available when they report on the purchase later.

6. What can our business accurately say about the purchase?
Be cautious when a provider supplies broad environmental marketing claims without showing you the evidence behind them. The evidence should come before the claim.

7. What happens after the initial project?
For tree planting in particular, putting seedlings in the ground is only one stage. Ask what happens after planting, whether the site is assessed again, and what ongoing reporting is provided.

8. What else does the project do?
Carbon is one outcome of forest restoration. Ask whether the project restores land damaged by wildfire or harvesting, supports wildlife habitat and water quality, creates local jobs, or is led by or partnered with Indigenous communities, and how the provider documents those outcomes.

These questions work whether you’re considering BGPP or another provider. The goal is to understand exactly what you’re paying for before deciding how your organization will report it.

What Canadian law requires you to be able to prove

Environmental claims made by Canadian businesses are subject to the Competition Act. Among other requirements, claims about the environmental benefits of a business or business activity must be based on adequate and proper substantiation, and the business making the representation bears the burden of proving that substantiation.

The Competition Bureau also looks at the general impression an environmental claim creates, not only its literal wording. Context, images and qualifying information can all affect what an audience reasonably understands a claim to mean. The Bureau cautions that a disclaimer or fine print may not correct a claim that creates a materially false or misleading impression in the first place.

That makes specificity useful. “We funded 50,000 trees planted in Manitoba” is a different claim from “we offset our company’s carbon footprint.” The second says substantially more about the environmental effect of the purchase and requires evidence capable of supporting that broader claim.

Before publishing an offset, carbon-neutral, net-zero or other environmental performance claim, make sure the evidence you hold supports what the audience is likely to understand the claim to mean. The Competition Bureau’s current environmental-claims guidance is the best place to check the federal requirements before publishing.

Is tree planting a legitimate climate solution?

Yes, when it’s described accurately. Forests store carbon as they grow, and Natural Resources Canada’s 2 Billion Trees program has funded planting across the country for carbon storage, cleaner air and water, biodiversity and jobs.

A planting project can deliver those benefits without generating a single carbon credit. For a business, that means describing the trees it funded and where they went, rather than presenting the planting as an offset.

Where tree planting can fit

Not every business researching carbon offsets is ultimately looking for the same thing. If your organization specifically needs carbon credits, look for a program that issues eligible credits and can provide the documentation your reporting requires. If you’re looking instead to fund Canadian forest restoration with a clear record of the trees your contribution funded, direct tree planting is a different option.

That’s where BGPP fits. Projects are led by Nekote LP (nay-go-tay) and partner First Nations, while BGPP funds, coordinates and reports on the planting. Rather than turning each funded tree into a carbon-credit claim, the model focuses on concrete planting information that businesses can use to understand what their contribution funded.

The distinction is simple: report what was actually measured.

Looking for a Canadian tree-planting partner?

If direct forest restoration fits your organization better than purchasing carbon credits, learn how BGPP works with businesses, what your contribution funds and what reporting is available.