The other day I was reading the US Climate Action Partnership (USCAP) Blueprint for Legislative Action on climate change. USCAP is a coalition of major corporations (like GE, Ford and PepsiCo) and highly-regarded environmental NGOs (like The Nature Conservancy and the Natural Resources Defense Council), so this is a group that stands to have some major influence on the final form of national climate change legislation.

USCAP is pushing for very aggressive carbon reductions, ultimately getting to 80% below 2005 levels by 2050, which is a widely acknowledged goal for emissions reductions, according to a broad range of organizations. They’ve set an intermediary goal of 42% below 2005 levels by 2030, which is starting to feel like it isn’t that far away.

But amidst recent reports saying that climate change is now irreversible and we may need to seek even deeper cuts than originally anticipated, the purpose of the voluntary market is clarified.

Getting to 80% by 2050 is going to be difficult enough. Getting a binding international agreement passed that cuts emission level more deeply and more rapidly than 80% by 2050 is probably a pipe dream. There will always be people and organizations that want to do more than governments are mandating; the voluntary market for carbon credits allows them to do that. The voluntary market can also be more innovative and nimble than an enormous government program like an economy-wide cap-and-trade. That’s why the voluntary market, when appropriately monitored by independent third-parties, can be a real part of the solution to climate change.