The remedy to global environment and development problems lies not in reducing growth, but in breaking the connection between expanded prosperity and depleted resources.
Greenhouse gas reporting is the process of measuring, documenting, and disclosing emissions that contribute to climate change. This practice is crucial for identifying emission sources and tracking progress towards reduction goals. As global awareness of environmental issues grows, the importance of structured frameworks for reporting emissions becomes evident.
Emerging policies and regulations are driving the need for standardized greenhouse gas reporting. These frameworks ensure that data is accurate, transparent, and comparable across different sectors. Effective reporting not only aids in regulatory compliance but also promotes informed decision-making for climate change mitigation.
In this blog post, we will explore key aspects of greenhouse gas reporting within the context of emerging policies. Topics include:
- The significance of accurate data
- The role of different sectors
- The necessity for international collaboration
Understanding Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Greenhouse gas (GHG) reporting involves the process of measuring, documenting, and disclosing greenhouse gas emissions. This systematic approach is crucial for tracking an organization’s carbon footprint, enabling stakeholders to assess environmental impact accurately.
Key Elements of GHG Reporting:
- Measurement: Quantifying emissions from various sources within an organization.
- Documentation: Keeping detailed records of emission data and methodologies used.
- Disclosure: Publicly sharing emission data to ensure transparency and accountability.
Reliable data management and transparent methodologies are essential components of effective GHG accounting. Accurate measurement and documentation foster trust among stakeholders, while transparent reporting practices enhance the credibility of climate action efforts. Robust GHG accounting frameworks underpin these processes, guiding organizations in consistent and comprehensive emission tracking.
The Link Between GHG Reporting and Climate Change Mitigation
Greenhouse gas reporting is essential in addressing climate change as it helps with making informed decisions and setting specific targets. By accurately reporting emissions, organizations can:
- Identify Main Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Understanding the primary sources of emissions within an organization is the first step toward effective management. This identification process enables businesses to pinpoint high-emission activities and areas for improvement.
- Monitor Progress Over Time: Consistent reporting allows for continuous tracking of emission levels, helping organizations to measure the effectiveness of their climate strategies and make necessary adjustments.
- Implement Effective Strategies to Reduce Emissions: With a clear understanding of their emission profiles, organizations can develop and implement targeted strategies that address specific sources of greenhouse gasses, thereby enhancing overall efficiency.
Advantages of Greenhouse Gas Reporting
This process offers several advantages:
- Informed Decision-Making: Provides data-driven insights for developing policies and measures to cut emissions. Reliable data helps decision-makers prioritize actions that achieve the greatest impact.
- Target Setting: Facilitates the creation of realistic and measurable emission reduction targets, aligning with international climate goals. Organizations can set benchmarks that are both ambitious and achievable, ensuring steady progress toward sustainability.
- Risk Management: Identifies potential risks related to regulatory changes, market shifts, or environmental impacts. Proactive reporting helps businesses anticipate and mitigate these risks effectively.
Enhancing Accountability
Accountability ensures that businesses and governments are held accountable for their climate commitments, fostering transparency. This accountability is crucial for several reasons:
- Stakeholder Trust: Transparent reporting builds trust among stakeholders, including investors, customers, and regulatory bodies. It demonstrates a commitment to environmental responsibility.
- Compliance: Helps organizations comply with national and international regulations regarding greenhouse gas emissions. Adhering to these standards avoids legal repercussions and enhances corporate reputation.
- Performance Benchmarks: Allows for benchmarking against industry standards or competitors. Organizations can gauge their performance relative to others in their sector, driving continuous improvement.
By integrating these practices into their operations, organizations not only contribute to global climate goals but also position themselves as leaders in sustainability.
Frameworks for Effective Greenhouse Gas Reporting
In an era where sustainability and environmental responsibility are paramount, the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) and the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) stand out as pivotal frameworks for businesses and governments. These initiatives help entities worldwide understand, manage, and communicate their impacts on critical sustainability issues, particularly greenhouse gas emissions. By providing standardized methods for measurement and disclosure, GRI and CDP aim to promote transparency and accountability, fostering a more sustainable future. This article delves into the strengths and limitations of both frameworks, examining their roles in driving climate action and supporting the evolving regulatory landscape.
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)
The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) aims to help businesses and governments worldwide understand and communicate their impact on critical sustainability issues. It provides standardized methods for organizations to measure, manage, and disclose their greenhouse gas emissions.
Strengths:
- Comprehensive Approach: Covers a wide range of sustainability topics beyond just greenhouse gas emissions.
- Global Reach: Widely adopted across various sectors and regions, enhancing comparability.
Limitations:
- Complexity: Detailed guidelines can be challenging for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) due to resource constraints.
- Flexibility: High flexibility in reporting can lead to inconsistencies.
Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP)
The Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) focuses on driving companies and cities to measure, disclose, manage, and share vital environmental information. It also provides standardized methods for organizations to measure, manage, and disclose their greenhouse gas emissions.
Strengths:
- Focus on Climate Change: Specifically tailored towards climate-related disclosures, aiding targeted climate action.
- Investor Influence: Strong influence among investors encourages corporate transparency.
Limitations:
- Voluntary Nature: Being a voluntary initiative may result in selective participation, potentially skewing data reliability.
- Cost Implications: Participation fees can be a barrier for smaller organizations.
Both GRI and CDP play crucial roles within emerging policies by providing structured approaches to greenhouse gas accounting. They promote consistent and comparable data collection, essential for credible reporting. As regulatory landscapes evolve, these frameworks will likely adapt to ensure they continue supporting robust climate action efforts.
Sector-specific Challenges and Opportunities in Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Greenhouse gas (GHG) reporting presents unique challenges and opportunities across sectors, each requiring tailored approaches for accurate emissions measurement and disclosure.
Power Generation
This sector is crucial in GHG reporting due to its significant global emissions. Challenges include:
- Complex Emission Sources: Emissions come from fossil fuels, renewables, and nuclear energy.
- Data Detail: Accurate reporting needs detailed data on energy production and consumption.
Industry
Manufacturing and mining face distinct challenges:
- Diverse Emission Profiles: Various processes emit different GHGs, complicating measurement.
- Technological Costs: Implementing new emission-reducing technologies can be expensive.
Transport
Heavy reliance on fossil fuels makes this sector’s reporting challenging:
- Mobile Sources: Tracking emissions from vehicles, ships, and aircraft is complex.
- Infrastructure Gaps: Lack of infrastructure for electric vehicles (EVs) hinders emission reductions.
Agriculture
Agriculture has unique challenges due to complex biological processes:
- Methane Emissions: Livestock farming produces significant methane.
- Land Use Changes: Deforestation for agriculture impacts carbon sequestration.
Each sector’s specific characteristics highlight the need for specialized GHG reporting approaches. Addressing these challenges with innovative solutions can significantly reduce global emissions.
Addressing Data Limitations and Uncertainties in Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Accurate greenhouse gas (GHG) reporting depends on having access to good quality data. However, many organizations face significant challenges in this area, including:
- Data Gaps: Incomplete or missing data can compromise the integrity of emissions inventories.
- Quality Assurance: Making sure that the data is accurate often requires strict quality control measures which can be time-consuming and expensive.
- Indirect Emissions: Scope 3 emissions, which are indirect emissions from activities like supply chain operations, are particularly difficult to measure because they are spread out and involve multiple parties.
Strategies for Improving Data Robustness
To make GHG reporting more reliable, organizations can use several strategies:
- Scenario Analysis: This involves creating multiple scenarios to account for uncertainties in data, providing a range of potential outcomes rather than a single figure.
- Third-Party Verification: Getting independent auditors to review and validate data can significantly improve its credibility and help identify areas for improvement.
By addressing these challenges through robust methodologies and leveraging external expertise, companies can improve the integrity of their GHG reporting and contribute more effectively to global climate goals.
Incorporating Climate Risk Disclosure into Greenhouse Gas Reporting
The changing landscape of climate-related financial reporting is becoming more connected to GHG disclosure efforts, showing the importance of being transparent. Climate risk disclosure requires organizations to assess and disclose how climate change affects their financial health and operational stability.
Key aspects include:
- Financial Impacts: Understanding how climate risks affect revenue streams, asset values, and liabilities.
- Operational Risks: Identifying vulnerabilities in supply chains and production processes due to climate change.
- Strategic Planning: Aligning business strategies with long-term sustainability goals to mitigate climate-related risks.
These elements ensure that stakeholders can make informed decisions while promoting accountability in corporate practices.
Driving Corporate Leadership Through Science-Based Targets and Net-Zero Commitments
Ambitious emissions reduction targets play a critical role in driving corporate climate action. The Science-Based Targets initiative (SBTi) provides companies with a clear pathway to achieve emissions reductions that align with the latest climate science. By setting science-based targets, businesses can ensure their strategies are robust, transparent, and consistent with global efforts to limit warming to 1.5°C.
Net-zero commitments further amplify this corporate responsibility. The Net-Zero by 2050 campaign encourages organizations to adopt comprehensive decarbonization plans aiming for net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by mid-century. This includes reducing direct emissions and investing in carbon removal solutions.
The Science-Based Targets initiative (SBTi)
The SBTi offers detailed guidance and resources to help companies set emissions reduction targets. This includes sector-specific methodologies and tools tailored to various industries, ensuring that each business can develop strategies aligned with scientific requirements. By following these guidelines, organizations can create robust plans that are actionable and effective.
Companies committing to science-based targets benefit from an external review process. This third-party validation ensures that the targets are ambitious, yet achievable, and align with the latest climate science. The SBTi’s endorsement not only boosts a company’s reputation but also builds trust among stakeholders, investors, and consumers by demonstrating a genuine commitment to sustainability.
The Net-Zero by 2050 Campaign
The Net-Zero by 2050 campaign pushes companies to develop comprehensive plans that address all aspects of their carbon footprint. This includes reducing emissions from direct operations (Scope 1), indirect emissions from energy consumption (Scope 2), and other indirect emissions throughout the value chain (Scope 3). By considering these varied sources, businesses can implement more integrated and effective decarbonization efforts.
Setting a target for net-zero emissions by 2050 helps organizations align their short-term actions with long-term sustainability objectives. This forward-looking approach ensures that immediate measures contribute to broader environmental goals, fostering resilience and adaptability in the face of evolving climate-related risks. It also provides a clear, strategic direction that can guide investments in innovation and sustainable technologies.
Moreover, participating in the campaign often involves adopting science-based targets, which are essential for ensuring that corporate actions are grounded in the latest climate science. This alignment not only enhances credibility but also supports global efforts to limit temperature rise, thereby safeguarding ecosystems and communities.
Additionally, engaging with the Net-Zero by 2050 initiative can enhance stakeholder relationships. Transparent reporting and progress on climate commitments can build trust with investors, customers, and regulatory bodies. Demonstrating leadership in sustainability can differentiate a company in the marketplace, attract environmentally conscious consumers, and potentially lead to financial incentives or support from green investment funds.
By integrating these initiatives, companies not only contribute to global climate goals but also gain competitive advantage through improved resilience and stakeholder trust.
Conclusion
Advancing greenhouse gas reporting practices in alignment with emerging policy frameworks remains critical for addressing the urgent challenges of climate change. Accurate and transparent GHG reporting enables informed decision-making, setting the stage for effective mitigation strategies.
Key Takeaways
- Prioritize Transparency: Ensuring transparency and accountability in greenhouse gas reporting within your organization fosters trust and drives impactful climate action.
- Advocate for Stronger Regulations: Supporting stronger government regulations and international cooperation can lead to more consistent and robust emission reduction efforts.
- Embrace Technological Innovations: Leveraging advancements in technology, such as blockchain and remote sensing, can significantly enhance data accuracy and transparency.
By prioritizing these elements, organizations can play a pivotal role in the global effort to mitigate climate change. The collaboration between businesses, governments, and international bodies is essential for creating a sustainable future. For more on how best to manage your greenhouse gas accounting feel free to contact us.
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.
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.
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?
-
Greenhouse Gases12 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change12 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 Energy9 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