Why would a city or a business buy renewable energy credits to claim to be 100% renewable?

Many cities and businesses have added “100% renewable” “net zero by 2050” to their list of goals. Some have stated this goal for many years while others are newcomers to the party.

Any of these cities or businesses could claim 100% renewable energy today by buying RECs, the environmental attribute associated with wind, solar and other renewable sources of power.

Across the United States there are more than enough RECs available for many cities and businesses to claim victory today. For example, in Colorado, Xcel Energy has more than 20 million RECs banked from previous years. This is possible because Xcel generated more renewable energy than was necessary to comply with the state renewable law. So the unused RECs can be saved for future years (in case the law changes) or a plant fails or a customer wants to purchase them.

A customer purchasing a REC from an exciting plant or a previous year doesn’t increase any additional emissions above beyond what would happen if the REC was sold. All that happens is that the legal right to claim the renewables changes. This is not how the temperature in the atmosphere works.

So why would a city or a business buy RECs to claim success? Won’t thoughtful residents and customers ask about emissions reduction, or hear that emissions have increased and wonder who is lying?

Do RECs, the mechanism designed to build trust, ultimately create mistrust by allowing cities and companies to claim victory over a problem that is clearly not solved?