I’m always wary of “carbon neutral” claims or schemes comparted to a zero carbon process. Zero carbon generally refers to processes which emit no carbon dioxide, whereas carbon neutral tends to means that they emit as much carbon dioxide as they always have, but are either attempting to sequester it or offset the carbon somewhere else.

If it were important enough to create a sequestration project or use an alternative form of energy which didn’t release carbon dioxide, we could have shut down the carbon producing process and implemented those climate benefits. It’s like taking a multi-vitamin each day but continuing to drink a fifth of Jack Daniels every weekend instead of just switching to drinking water. You should really try and cut down on the alcohol and consider drinking more water, no matter how good it is to take the multi-vitamin.