Is Amazon Selling Carbon Credits a Genuine Climate Action or Greenwashing?

Amazon’s move to sell carbon credits and set the criteria for companies to join its Climate Pledge raises some concerns for me about conflicts of interest and self-regulation. Given its business model of maximising sales, driving consumption, and using its marketing power to encourage endless purchasing, it’s worth questioning whether Amazon should have the authority to evaluate other companies' emissions efforts.

 On the surface, the announcement that Amazon will sell carbon credits and assess companies addressing Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions seems like a step in the right direction. Encouraging businesses to take responsibility for their carbon footprint is necessary. But can a company built on overconsumption and aggressive marketing really be trusted to set the standard for climate action?

 Amazon’s business model is designed for relentless growth - persuading people to buy more, and prioritizing convenience above all else. This directly conflicts with the urgent need to reduce global emissions, which continue to rise year on year. So, when a company like Amazon takes on the role of evaluating sustainability efforts, red flags emerge for me. We need to ask critical questions about credibility, transparency, and whether this is genuine action or just another case of corporate greenwashing.

 Amazon claims to operate on 100% renewable electricity across its own operations, but what about the emissions from the vast network of vendors on its platform? Their sustainability report is vague on this point. While Amazon may be greening its direct footprint, the emissions from its global supply chain and third-party sellers remain largely unaccounted for. If Amazon is truly serious about leading climate action, it must ensure its evaluation process is independently verified and that vendors are held to the same sustainability standards. Given the scale and complexity of its operations, achieving net zero by 2040 seems highly ambitious, if not a tad unrealistic. Happy to be proved wrong.

 Amazon’s move into carbon markets may be an attempt to position itself as a climate leader, but without fundamental changes to how it operates, it risks being yet another example of corporate greenwashing. The real question is: will this initiative drive actual decarbonization, or will it simply provide companies with an easier way to appear sustainable while continuing business as usual?

Sustainability initiatives must be accountable, transparent, and focused on real impact and not just PR-driven efforts that allow companies to claim climate leadership while fuelling overconsumption. While Amazon’s sustainability efforts should be acknowledged, we must be careful not to mistake clever marketing for real climate action.

 If Amazon truly wants to lead on climate action, it should shift its business model to prioritize reduction, reuse, and recycling. Encouraging circular economy practices such as refurbishing and reselling products, minimizing waste in its supply chain, and eliminating unnecessary packaging would have a far greater impact than simply selling carbon credits. Real climate leadership means transforming operations to align with sustainability, not just offsetting emissions while maintaining business as usual. This is the leadership our world needs to see and large corporates have it in their hands to action significant change and drive down our emissions. One way or another, they will be forced to change the business model.

#overconsumption #ethicalbusiness #carboncredits #sustainability #circulareconomy #consciousconsumerism