Gold mining is not only energy-intensive but is also challenging. Miners weigh various factors like geology, ore grades, depth, and transport distances which could potentially turn into challenges as well. However, as the world is transitioning to sustainability, gold fields are significantly considering reliable energy supply and management not just for power operations but also for reducing emissions.
The gold mining industry as a whole has a clear path to decarbonization that aligns with the Paris Agreement. They aim to cut absolute emissions by 50% and net emissions by 30% on their journey to net zero by 2050.
S&P Global Commodity Insights recently launched a gold emissions curve that showed, in 2024 emissions were lower than the 2021 baseline. It revealed:
“329 primary gold mines emitted greenhouse gases at an average rate of 792 kilograms of CO2 equivalent per paid ounce of gold (kgCO2e/oz Au) produced, 39 kgCO2e/oz Au. The emissions are lower than in 2021.”

Tackling Scope 1 and Scope 2 Gold Emissions
The report further illustrated that Since 2021, Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions per ounce of gold produced have steadily declined. The overall progress was a result of renewable adoption for electricity generation, operational improvements, and technological upgrades in on-site operations. In this regard, many gold mining companies turned to power purchase agreements and carbon offsets in their decarbonization strategy,
However, addressing Scope 1 emissions still remains a challenge. This is because they are related directly to mining operations like equipment use, fuel consumption, and diverse on-site processes.
- Scope 1 emissions increased by 0.68 million metric tons of CO₂ equivalent between 2021 and 2023.
Conversely, scope 2 emissions are easier to mitigate and have shown remarkable improvements. They are associated with purchased electricity, heating, cooling, and steam, and have shown notable improvements.
- In 2023, Scope 2 emissions accounted for 39% of total emissions, down from 41% in 2021.
- Scope 2 emissions dropped by 1.32 million metric tons with the 2021 baseline despite the increase in gold production by 2.1 million ounces.

Top 3 Low Emitter Gold Mines
Lundin Gold’s Fruta del Norte
Lundin Gold Inc., based in Vancouver, British Columbia, is a Canadian mining company with a strong focus on sustainability and efficiency. The company 100% owns the Fruta del Norte gold mine in southeast Ecuador, which has been producing gold since late 2019.
Known for its low carbon emissions, high-grade output, and cost efficiency, Fruta del Norte is among the most environmentally responsible and productive gold mines globally. In 2023, it achieved an impressive production of 481,274 ounces of gold, making it one of South America’s largest gold producers.
The company holds 28 metallic mineral concessions and three construction material concessions in Ecuador’s Zamora Chinchipe province. As per its sustainability report,
- Lundin Gold maintains an industry-leading greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions intensity of just 0.08 tCO2e per ounce of gold produced. This makes the miner a top low-carbon gold producer.
The mine is powered by Ecuador’s national grid, which sources 81% of its energy from renewables. This is how it achieves significantly lower Scope 2 emissions.
Source: Lundin Gold
Centerra Gold Inc.
In 2023, Centerra Gold Inc. achieved a 77% drop in emissions intensity at its Öksüt mine, despite production suspension in 2022 due to mercury detection. They resumed operations in 2023 and sold higher gold ounces after resuming operations in June 2023. A mercury abatement system was installed to restart the mine. This led to the production of 195,926 ounces of gold—the highest since 2020- and consequently, it cut down emissions.
As per their sustainability report,
- Global Scope 1 emissions totaled 107,384 metric tons of CO₂e in 2023. The company’s two main operating mines, Mount Milligan and Öksüt, accounted for 90,655 metric tons.
Mount Milligan reduced emissions by 7% due to shorter haulage distances and optimized pit sequencing, while Öksüt achieved a 21% decrease from temporary mining interruptions and improved haulage cycles.
- Global Scope 2 emissions totaled 33,790 metric tons of CO₂e in 2023, with 13,185 metric tons from Mount Milligan and Öksüt.
Despite a 7% rise in electricity use, emissions remained stable through efficient energy use. Notably, Scope 3 emissions, with purchased goods and services contributed to more than 50%.
Source: Centerra-Gold
The company uses the Greenhouse Gas Protocol for emissions reporting and is exploring cost-effective decarbonization pathways to cut Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions in the coming years. Additionally, it is evaluating opportunities to reduce scope 3 emissions.
Agnico Eagle Mines Ltd.
The Canada-based gold mining company, is the world’s third-largest gold producer, with operations in Canada, Australia, Finland, and Mexico. In 2023, the company achieved significant progress in reducing its emissions, particularly with its Kittila mine, which halved its Scope 2 emissions intensity. They achieved this by sourcing all of its grid electricity from zero-emission sources.
Source: Agnico Eagle
In total, Agnico Eagle produced 3.44 million ounces of gold in 2023, and all 11 of its active operations outperformed the industry average for emissions per ounce of gold produced.
The company’s total Scope 1 and 2 emissions in 2023 were 1,337,000 tCO₂e, a 3% reduction from 2022 and a 5% decrease from the 2021 baseline.
The mining giant has robust plans to upgrade its technological innovation, decarbonization efforts, and its Energy and Greenhouse Gas Management Strategy. Its dedication to sustainability and emissions reduction underscores its leadership in responsible gold production.
Other Players
For 2023, PJSC Polyus has fully offset its Scope 2 emissions since 2021 by sourcing renewable energy and acquiring carbon-free electric energy certificates from H2 Clean Energy LLC to cover 72,000 metric tons of CO₂e in 2023.
Additionally, Kinross Gold Corp. reduced its Scope 2 emissions intensity by 31% and Barrick Gold’s Nevada operations significantly cut 197,000 metric tons in 2023 with the 2020 baseline.
These reductions primarily came from renewable energy sources like hydroelectric and power purchase agreements to buy energy credits from solar power plants.
On the flip side, Sibanye Stillwater had the highest emission footprint…
The S&P Global report also highlighted that among all gold mines, South African mines have record-high emissions. And Sibanye Stillwater’s Cooke operation topped the list. It recorded a massive amount of 9,980 kg CO₂e per ounce of gold in 2023. The mine relies heavily on electricity from South Africa’s coal-based grid and processes low-grade historic tailings through two plants, Cooke and Ezulwini.
Outside South Africa, Pueblo Viejo in the Dominican Republic ranked second, with 3,236 kg CO₂e per ounce of gold in 2023, indicating a 25% rise from 2022. Emissions intensity increased due to a 22% drop in production, lower head grades, and reliance on diesel-powered plants.
Gold’s Role in a Sustainable Future
Gold plays a key role in modern technologies and the shift to a low-carbon economy. Its inclusion in investment portfolios also boosts resilience against climate risks, solidifying its status as a sustainable asset in global finance.
The gold mining industry is aligning with sustainability goals by cutting its carbon footprint while increasing production. This balance highlights better energy efficiency, cleaner technologies, and improved operational strategies.
The post Gold Emissions Trends: Who Are the Top 3 Low Emitters? appeared first on Carbon Credits.
Carbon Footprint
SBTi Net-Zero Standard V2: What the Revision Means for Every Business
Key takeaways
- SBTi is the default reference point for corporate climate action: 51% of Fortune Global 500 companies now hold net-zero targets, up from 8% in 2020, and over 11,000 organizations worldwide have SBTi-validated targets.
- Net Zero Standard V2 redefines climate leadership as reducing emissions and mitigating ongoing emissions, not reduction alone.
- The new standard adds flexibility through five-year cycles, a “best efforts” standard, and an Asset Transition Method for companies whose path to net-zero doesn’t fit a straight-line trajectory.
- Voluntary carbon credits are formally recognized for the first time, with reduction and removal credits accepted from 2027, and removals required from 2035.
- Companies with 2030 targets keep using V1 for their current cycle and move to V2 in 2028; companies without targets can start using V2 on February 1, 2027.
Why every business needs to understand the SBTi Net-Zero Standard revision
The Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) has become the default reference point for credible corporate climate action. Net-zero targets are now held by 51% of Fortune Global 500 (FG500) companies, up dramatically from just 8% in 2020, and more than 11,000 organizations worldwide have set SBTi-validated targets.
However, SBTi’s influence extends well beyond the companies formally participating in the program. Every business in the value chain of an SBTi participant will have to reduce its own carbon emissions, and businesses that aren’t SBTi participants themselves still look to the program for guidance on climate action.
In short, SBTi gives every business a credible blueprint for climate action, and companies that follow its principles can pursue climate action with confidence, whether or not they’re formally part of the program.
How will the Net Zero Standard revision affect business climate action?
SBTi participation is expected to grow. Despite strong target-setting participation among the F500, only 17% of companies use the SBTi Net Zero Standard V1 beyond target setting, largely because its rules have been seen as too rigid to apply in practice. Much of the Net Zero Standard revision has focused on creating more flexibility to enable higher participation. Medium and small businesses will also increasingly feel pressure for climate action, since SBTi mandates that its participants reduce carbon emissions across their value chains.
Net Zero Standard V2 also redefines climate leadership: leading climate action now means reducing emissions and mitigating ongoing emissions. Reducing your own emissions while ignoring the emissions you continue to release along the way is no longer considered leadership. Supporting voluntary carbon projects with high-integrity carbon credits is now backed by the leading authority on corporate climate action.
What lessons shaped the Net Zero Standard V2 revision?
The revision reflects a few learnings about what actually drives climate progress, and how SBTi built those lessons into the new standard.
| Net Zero Standard V1 Learnings | Net Zero Standard V2 Implementation |
|---|---|
| Making real short-term progress is more important and more difficult than making big long-term promises | Focus on short-term climate progress |
| Every company has a different path to net zero that doesn’t always fit generalized net-zero rules | Create asset transition plans based on each company’s unique asset lifecycles and capital planning |
| We need to mitigate our ongoing emissions to keep global carbon emissions in check | Reduce global carbon emissions by financing voluntary carbon projects with high-integrity carbon credits |
What are the key changes between the old and new Net Zero Standard?
Both versions of the standard are grounded in net-zero by 2050. However, the old standard treated climate leadership as simply reducing emissions, expected a long-term commitment to net zero, based emission reduction targets on generalized net-zero goals, revoked status from companies that fell behind on targets, and ignored voluntary carbon projects entirely.
The new standard treats climate leadership as reducing emissions and mitigating ongoing emissions. It shifts the focus to short-term progress through five-year cycles, and it bases emission reduction targets on both the net-zero goal and a company’s own asset decarbonization plan. A new Asset Transition Method lets companies set decarbonization targets through asset plans with committed, verifiable steps; an ambitious but achievable path based on a company’s starting point, financial resources, and technology, with multiple pathways to reflect the unique opportunities and constraints of different industries and companies.
Crucially, the new standard moves to a “best efforts” basis that creates real flexibility on progress against targets. Businesses that miss their targets can keep their status if they’ve used “every lever” within their control, and minimum progress rules will be set out in the SBTi Assurance Manual.
Finally, the new standard formally uses voluntary carbon projects to mitigate ongoing emissions. From 2027 through 2034, this mitigation is recognized, and both carbon reduction and removal credits are accepted. From 2035 forward, mitigation with carbon removal credits becomes required, with durability matching between the removal and the emission it offsets.
| Old Net Zero Standard | New Net Zero Standard |
|---|---|
| Grounded in net-zero by 2050 | Grounded in net-zero by 2050 |
| Climate leadership is reducing emissions | Climate leadership is reducing emissions and mitigating ongoing emissions |
| Make a long-term commitment to net-zero | Focus on short-term progress in 5-year cycles |
| Emission reduction targets are based on net-zero goal |
|
| Businesses who fall behind targets lose status |
|
| Ignores voluntary carbon projects |
|
When does the new Net Zero Standard take effect?
Companies with existing 2030 targets should continue using the old Net Zero Standard for their current cycle, and start using the new Net Zero Standard in 2028 to set targets for the next cycle (2030–2035).
Companies that don’t yet have targets can use the new Net Zero Standard starting February 1, 2027.
What are SBTi’s Category A and Category B companies?
The new Net Zero Standard splits companies into two categories, with different requirements attached to each.
Category A covers large companies from all countries and medium-sized companies from high-income countries. A company from any country qualifies if it meets at least one of: net turnover of €450 million or more, or 1,000 or more full-time employees. A company from a high-income country qualifies if its Scope 1 and 2 emissions are 10,000 tCO2e or more, or if it meets at least two of: balance sheet of €25 million or more, net turnover of €50 million or more, or 250 or more full-time employees.
Category B covers small companies from all countries and medium-sized companies from lower-income countries.
How do Scope 1 targets work under Net Zero Standard V2?
Scope 1 targets aim to transition companies to net-zero direct emissions by 2050 or sooner, and companies can choose from three approaches.
- Absolute emissions reduction follows a straight-line emissions trajectory from the target base year to the net-zero year.
- Emissions intensity reduction lets companies follow sector-specific pathways designed to reflect the reduction opportunities available in sectors like steel, cement, or chemicals.
- Asset transition is designed for companies whose capital stock turnover doesn’t follow a linear or sector pathway. These companies design a transition plan to operate existing assets efficiently and replace them with low-carbon assets, using predetermined milestones.
How do Scope 2 targets work under Net Zero Standard V2?
Scope 2 targets address emissions from purchased electricity through three pathways:
- Reducing electricity consumption,
- Reducing grid consumption by installing onsite or direct-line offsite clean energy generation, and
- Cleaning up the regional grid using market-based tools like PPAs, RECs, and GOs that drive clean energy development.
V2 introduces a dual Scope 2 framework requiring two separate targets, with an overall goal of 100% low-carbon electricity by 2040.
The location-based target addresses the carbon intensity of a company’s physical power use, and requires companies to show that their grid consumption is falling and/or that their physical grid use is getting cleaner; in other words, that their market-based solutions are actually making the grid cleaner.
The market-based (or zero-carbon electricity) target tracks a company’s use of low-carbon power generation contracts and Energy Attribute Certificates. It requires geographical matching of these certificates with electricity consumption based on deliverability regions (grid regions); annual matching is allowed, though hourly matching is encouraged. Category A companies with large electricity loads must report the percentage of their Scope 2 electricity consumption matched with low-carbon attributes on an hourly basis, and there’s an optional recognition framework for companies that meet hourly matching thresholds.
How do Scope 3 targets work under Net Zero Standard V2?
Scope 3 targets share the same 2050-or-sooner net-zero goal, but companies set near-term targets only for material emissions sources in their value chain and areas where they have real influence. Long-term Scope 3 targets are generally not required.
Limited, justified exclusions are allowed for near-term targets, including categories that individually account for less than 5% of total Scope 3 emissions, and activities where a company lacks practical influence, like leased assets it doesn’t operationally control, or the processing of sold products. Optional exclusions are also available in specific categories.
Companies can choose from three approaches to near-term Scope 3 targets:
- An overarching emissions reduction target, which follows a linear contraction of emissions from the base year to residual emissions of 10% or less by 2050 or sooner;
- An overarching supplier/customer alignment target, benchmarked against a growing share of tier 1 suppliers and customers reaching net-zero by 2050 or sooner; or
- A category- or activity-specific target, tailored for companies with concentrated emissions in particular Scope 3 categories or high-emitting activities.
What is “ongoing emissions mitigation” under the new SBTi standard?
This is one of the most significant additions in Net Zero Standard V2. Accelerated climate contributions are needed to help the world achieve climate objectives, limit temperature overshoot, mitigate transition risks, and support the scale-up of climate solutions, and V2 formally recognizes that. Ongoing emissions mitigation runs as a parallel track to companies also reducing their own emissions.
The framework is initially voluntary, with recognition available at three contribution levels to encourage early action.
- Engaged companies address more than 1% of total Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions.
- Advanced companies address more than 10% of total Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions, including 100% of Scope 1 and 2 emissions.
- Leadership companies address 100% of total Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions with a contribution budget of $80/tCO2e.
Carbon credits used for this purpose have to meet certain quality standards. They must be ex-post (issued after the mitigation has actually occurred), independently third-party-assured, emissions reductions or removals, measured in tCO2e, that occur within five years prior to the reporting year. They must be sourced from outside the company’s own value chain. Further minimum criteria will be set to align with high-integrity frameworks, with additional details on the recognition program expected in the second half of 2026.
Starting in 2035, carbon removals become mandatory for Category A companies. From that point, the carbon removal coverage requirement rises linearly from 1% of Scope 1–3 emissions to 100% by a company’s net-zero year. Within that, 10% of long-lived GHG emissions must specifically be covered by durable removals, also rising linearly to 100% by the net-zero year.
How must companies neutralize residual emissions?
At a company’s net-zero target year and thereafter, it must reduce its Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions to zero or to residual levels, and neutralize all residual emissions using eligible carbon removals. Those removals have to meet two conditions: they must occur within the same reporting period as the residual emissions they’re neutralizing, and long-lived GHGs must be neutralized with long-lived removals, matching the durability of the removal to the atmospheric lifetime of the emission being addressed.
What is the SBTi implementation hierarchy?
Net Zero Standard V2 also lays out how companies should prioritize their actions for credible target delivery, in three tiers.
- Direct actions, at the activity level, are actions that reduce emissions at the source within a company’s own operations and value chain; things like efficiency improvements, fuel switching, and engaging suppliers and customers to reduce their emissions.
- Actions within shared systems, or activity pools that reduce the emissions of shared systems like electricity or gas grids. This includes market instruments that convey low-carbon attributes, such as PPAs, RECs, and GOs, all of which must meet minimum integrity criteria that SBTi will elaborate on in future guidance.
- Sector-level actions relate to the same type of activity occurring in a relevant geography or system, in a way that meaningfully reduces the emissions a company is responsible for.
How Terrapass helps businesses meet the new SBTi standard
As the rules around carbon credits become more rigorous, the quality of the credits behind them matters more than ever. Terrapass has expanded our global network of carbon projects: more project types, locations, prices, ICVCM CCPs, and UN SDGs, spanning super-pollutant destruction, nature-based solutions, and durable removals. We offer Green-e® Climate Certification and we only source from third-party-verified projects on ICVCM-Eligible registries.
We also help clients with impact beyond carbon: EACs, RECs, and GOs including Green-e® Certified credits that support leading renewable energy projects; water credits that support water restoration projects; and custom environmental product needs like RNG and SAF. Wherever your organization is on its sustainability journey, we help clients around the world address climate risk, advance their environmental and social goals, and get the most out of their sustainability budgets.
FAQ: SBTi Net-Zero Standard revision
What is the SBTi Net-Zero Standard?
It’s the framework the Science Based Targets initiative publishes for companies that want validated, credible net-zero targets tied to limiting global warming.
What is changing in the SBTi Net Zero Standard V2 revision?
The biggest changes are more flexibility (five-year cycles and a “best efforts” standard), a new Asset Transition Method for companies whose emissions don’t follow a straight-line path, and formal recognition of voluntary carbon credits for mitigating ongoing emissions.
When do companies need to switch to the new SBTi standard?
If your company already has 2030 targets, you keep using V1 for your current cycle and move to V2 in 2028. If you don’t have targets yet, you can start using V2 as of February 1, 2027.
Can companies use carbon credits to meet SBTi targets?
They can. Under V2, high-integrity carbon reduction and removal credits count toward mitigating ongoing emissions from 2027 through 2034. Starting in 2035, only removal credits count, and they need to be durability-matched to the emissions they offset.
What’s the difference between Category A and Category B companies under SBTi?
Category A is large companies everywhere plus medium-sized companies in high-income countries, based on thresholds like revenue, headcount, or emissions. Category B is small companies everywhere and medium-sized companies in lower-income countries.
What happens if a company misses its SBTi target?
Under the old standard, falling behind could cost a company its SBTi status. Under V2’s “best efforts” approach, a company can hold onto its status as long as it’s used every lever within its control, with minimum progress rules coming in the SBTi Assurance Manual.
Sources: This post is based on Terrapass’s internal analysis of the SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard V2.0. Facts and figures were checked against SBTi’s official V2.0 announcement, SBTi’s Corporate Net-Zero Standard V2.0 — Chapter 6: Ongoing Emissions Responsibility, Trellis’s coverage of the standard, Trellis’s reporting on Ongoing Emissions Recognition costs, Sylvera’s analysis of what comes next, Anthesis Group’s Fortune 500 net-zero commitments research, and Climate Impact Partners’ seventh annual FG500 analysis, as reported by CarbonUnits.com.
The post SBTi Net-Zero Standard V2: What the Revision Means for Every Business appeared first on Terrapass.
Carbon Footprint
How to improve Scope 3 data accuracy for CSRD
For most businesses, the emissions that matter most sit outside their own walls. Scope 3 emissions, everything generated across your value chain, from the suppliers who make your inputs to the customers who use your products, typically make up the majority of a company’s total carbon footprint. Under the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), those value-chain emissions now have to be measured and disclosed with a rigour that spend-based estimates alone struggle to satisfy. This guide sets out how to improve Scope 3 data accuracy for CSRD: the calculation methods open to you, how to move from estimates to verified supplier data, and how to govern that data so it holds up to audit.
![]()
Carbon Footprint
How community stewardship makes carbon credits durable
A carbon credit is a commitment that extends well into the future. The tonne of CO₂ compensated for today from a nature-based carbon project must remain out of the atmosphere for good, which means the forest behind the credit has to remain standing long after the transaction is complete. For any buyer, this raises a defining question: What ensures that the forest endures?
![]()
-
Climate Change12 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases12 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy10 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿:探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测

