Connect with us

Published

on

Top 5 Sustainable Bitcoin Mining Companies To Watch Out For

Bitcoin mining has historically been linked to high energy use and environmental concerns. However, some companies are changing this image by using renewable energy, practicing transparency, and following strong governance principles. These miners show that it is possible to grow profits while reducing environmental impact.

Before we get to know the top sustainable bitcoin mining companies to put on your radar, let’s learn why sustainability is crucial in this space.

Why Greener Mining Matters: Bitcoin’s ESG Future

Bitcoin’s method of securing its network uses a lot of electricity. This has drawn criticism because most mining still depends on fossil fuels. And thus, sustainable miners are working to separate Bitcoin growth from carbon emissions.

bitcoin energy use
Source: Digiconomist

As governments and investors seek cleaner energy, companies using renewables can gain. They will enjoy better market access and face fewer regulatory issues.

Sustainable mining also helps communities and local power grids. Some miners locate near renewable power sources where they can take advantage of excess energy and even support grid stability. Clear operations lower environmental and noise issues. This helps build strong ties with local residents.

Moreover, renewable energy often lowers costs, sometimes to less than one or two cents per kilowatt-hour. This reduces the cost to mine each Bitcoin and protects miners from fossil fuel price swings. Since Bitcoin rewards decrease over time, miners with cheap power will stay profitable longer.

In a crowded marketplace, miners that demonstrate a commitment to clean energy can stand out. Certifications and carbon offsets boost their reputation. They also attract investors looking for responsible, future-proof miners. Speaking of, here are the top five  bitcoin mining companies showcasing their sustainable, greener operations. 

1. Gryphon Digital Mining: Carbon-Negative Mining Using Hydroelectric and Flare Gas Power

Gryphon Digital Mining is among the first publicly traded Bitcoin miners focused on being carbon-neutral, and now carbon-negative. In 2023, over 98% of its electricity came from renewable sources, mainly hydroelectric power, reaching 100% early in 2024. This was confirmed through independent audits.

The company got a sustainable Bitcoin certification, showing its dedication to clear environmental goals. Gryphon regularly publishes its full emissions data, providing transparency for investors. It also links executive pay to sustainability achievements, ensuring accountability.

Gryphon’s mining fleet works efficiently and uses about 28.6 joules for each terahash. This setup produces nearly one exahash of computational power every second. In 2024, it produced Bitcoin valued at millions of dollars monthly, maintaining high uptime and low power costs. The acquisition of flare gas-powered mining assets increased capacity. It costs about one cent per kilowatt-hour.

Gryphon projects a pipeline of 500 megawatts in new clean energy projects, including flare gas sites. It recently bought a large industrial property in Alberta to expand. With new leaders, the company plans to hit several exahashes per second soon. They will focus on using sustainable energy sources.

Gryphon bitcoin
Source: Gryphon

ESG, Growth, and Strategy

  • In 2023, GP4BTC received sustainable Bitcoin certification from Energy Web. This was part of a new effort to standardize energy measurement in mining.
  • Plans a 500 MW pipeline of low-cost power projects. This includes flare gas acquisition in Louisiana. It adds 59 PH/s right away at about 1¢/kWh.
  • Recently bought an 850-acre industrial site in Alberta for future growth. This move comes under their new CEO, Steve Gutterman. He previously grew TRADE Financial from $1B to $35B in assets.
  • Planning to expand hash rate toward multiple EH/s by mid‑2020s, supported by clean power sourcing and carbon-negative posture.

2. CleanSpark: Multi-Source Renewable Energy and Community-Focused Mining

CleanSpark shifted from energy services to Bitcoin mining with a strong environmental commitment. Its mining data centers are in New York, Georgia, and Mississippi. They get about 94% of their power from carbon-free sources like nuclear, hydro, wind, and solar.

CleanSpark
Source: CleanSpark

One key partnership is with Coinmint, which operates a large hydro-powered facility in New York. This site reports nearly full uptime and plans to reach 100% renewable power. CleanSpark also emphasizes immersion cooling technology, which extends equipment life by reducing heat and energy use. This reduces electronic waste and lowers overall power demand.

The company talks to local leaders before building new facilities. This way, they can address concerns and show benefits, which helps gain social acceptance.

CleanSpark aims to boost its mining capacity from one exahash per second to two. The company is focused on using clean power for this growth.

The company has deep roots in the energy industry since 1987. This experience helps them manage power costs and join grid programs that reward flexibility in demand. It aims for net-zero emissions of direct and indirect operations by 2027.

Targets, Expansion, and Positioning

  • CleanSpark has energy infrastructure from 1987. This gives it an edge in negotiating demand-response and grid service programs.
  • Through ATL Data Centers and Coinmint, CleanSpark exceeded 470 PH/s earlier in 2022, mining 3,768 BTC (over time) and averaging ~4 BTC/day at peak.
  • It aims for net-zero Scope 1 and 2 emissions by 2027. Also, it plans to increase capacity from about 1 EH/s to 2 EH/s and more. The focus will be on keeping a high clean energy share.

3. TeraWulf: Mining Powered by Nuclear and Hydroelectric Energy at Low Cost

TeraWulf runs two major Bitcoin mining sites in the United States. The Lake Mariner facility in New York mostly uses electricity from hydro and nuclear sources. This means it provides about 91% zero-carbon power. The company owns this big operation that has about 110 megawatts of capacity. Plus, it offers over 3.6 exahashes per second of computing power.

The Nautilus Cryptomine site in Pennsylvania uses nuclear power from the Susquehanna plant. It is partly owned and run with partners. This setup cuts electrical costs to about two cents per kilowatt-hour. This boosts profitability.

After selling its stake in the Nautilus project, TeraWulf reinvested capital into expanding Lake Mariner. The company plans to reach approximately 238 megawatts of total capacity by late 2024. It favors the most energy-efficient mining hardware and aims for 100% clean energy powering its operations.

Terawulf
Source: Terawulf

Performance Metrics and Strategic Growth

  • By mid-2023, TeraWulf had scaled to around 5.5 exahashes per second and 160 megawatts of mining capacity. It maintained a low cost per Bitcoin mined, well below industry averages.
  • In Q2 2024, the company raised its capacity to around 10 exahashes per second. This change led to a 130% year-over-year revenue boost.
  • TeraWulf plans to keep using the best mining hardware, like the Bitmain S19 XP Pro and S19 j Pro, which have around 21.5–29.5 J/TH efficiency. They also aim to expand their zero-carbon power sourcing to 100%.

4. Iris Energy: Scaling 100% Renewable Bitcoin Mining and AI Compute Ventures

Based in Australia, Iris Energy, now known as IREN operates mining sites in Canada, Texas, and Australia. Its energy mix is mostly hydroelectric power. It also includes wind, solar, and renewable energy certificates. This adds up to around 97% renewable power.

Iris Energy locates modular mining facilities in regions with a surplus of clean energy. These sites turn extra renewable electricity into Bitcoin. This helps balance local grids and supports communities.

The company owns its land, data centers, and grid connections. This gives it full control over energy use and mining efficiency.

Although it posted modest losses in fiscal 2025, forecasts predict positive earnings in the near future. Institutional investors show interest, partly due to the company’s clean energy commitment.

Iris also develops AI computing services powered entirely by renewable energy. These high-performance GPU clusters provide additional revenue streams alongside Bitcoin mining.

Metrics, Market Position, and Growth

  • The stock is attracting strong institutional interest with an A+/A‑ ratings from IBD and a top relative strength score of 98.
  • By mid-2025, Iris Energy operated at an estimated 50 exahashes per second and reported strong sales growth (172%).
  • Iris offers AI-driven cloud services, powered by renewable-energy-fed GPU clusters (e.g. NVIDIA H100). This adds a higher-margin revenue layer atop its Bitcoin business.
  • The company aims to reach 20 exahashes per second by 2026. It is also looking into green hydrogen and more renewable energy projects.

5. Bitfarms: Hydroelectric Mining with Expanded High-Performance Computing

Bitfarms operates mining facilities in Québec, Washington State, Argentina, and Paraguay. These sites primarily use hydroelectric energy, allowing for 95 to 99% renewable power consumption.

The company has a complete environmental, health, and safety management system. Its board oversees this system. It has teamed up with recycling groups to handle electronic waste properly. This effort creates verified carbon credits.

In 2023, Bitfarms operated approximately 5 exahashes per second in Argentina and aimed to increase to around 6 exahashes. The company has shifted part of its focus to U.S. sites, which offer favorable energy prices and market conditions. Bitfarms also invests in high-performance computing and AI infrastructure.

However, not all developments have been smooth. In Paraguay, a mining facility created loud noise pollution. This bothered local residents and led to legal complaints. It still relied on extra hydroelectric power. Bitfarms has since taken steps to resolve these issues. This case highlights the need for miners to manage community impacts carefully.

The company has restructured its operations into divisions. One focuses on traditional mining, and the other covers broader computing services.

Performance, Social Dimensions, and Future Roadmap

  • By Jan 2025, the operating hash rate reached ~12.8 EH/s, with a strategic shift toward U.S. facilities to leverage favorable power and market access. 
  • Total energy portfolio exceeded 950 MW, with flexibility across Bitcoin mining and HPC/AI operations.
  • Developing a 120 MW high-performance computing and AI site in Sharon, Pennsylvania, within the PJM grid—seeking to monetize infrastructure across both mining and HPC sectors.
Bitfarms
Source: Bitfarms

Clean Hashes, Clear Conscience: A New Era in Bitcoin Mining

The five companies profiled here—Gryphon Digital Mining, CleanSpark, TeraWulf, Iris Energy, and Bitfarms—illustrate the evolving landscape of sustainable Bitcoin mining. Each company combines renewable power, transparency, and strategic growth with a commitment to environmental responsibility.

Gryphon leads with carbon-negative mining and flare gas utilization. CleanSpark emphasizes multi-source renewables and community engagement. TeraWulf focuses on nuclear and hydro to minimize costs.

Meanwhile, Iris Energy specializes in modular, 100% renewable operations and diversifies into AI computing. And Bitfarms leverages hydroelectric sites and expands into high-performance computing while managing community challenges.

Overall, sustainable bitcoin mining is becoming essential. With rising energy scrutiny, investor demand for climate alignment, and stricter regulations, these firms offer scalable models that align economic growth with ecological responsibility.

The post Top 5 Sustainable Bitcoin Mining Companies To Watch Out For appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Continue Reading

Carbon Footprint

SBTi Net-Zero Standard V2: What the Revision Means for Every Business

Published

on

The Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) just rolled out a major revision to its Net-Zero Standard, Version 2.0. It changes how companies set climate targets, how much room they actually have to hit those targets, and how carbon credits fit into a credible net-zero strategy. Below, we break down what’s changing, when it takes effect, and why it matters even if your business isn’t formally an SBTi participant.

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
  • Emission reduction targets are based on net-zero goal and asset decarbonization plan
  • Adds SBTi’s Asset Transition Method
  • Decarbonization targets are set through asset plans with committed, verifiable steps
  • Ambitious but achievable path based on starting point, financial resources, technology
  • Multiple pathways for unique opportunities and constraints of industries and companies
Businesses who fall behind targets lose status
  • “Best efforts” basis creates flexibility on progress to targets
  • Businesses that miss targets can keep status if they used “every lever” in their control
  • Minimum progress rules will be provided in the SBTi Assurance Manual
Ignores voluntary carbon projects
  • Uses voluntary carbon projects to mitigate ongoing emissions
  • 2027–2034: Mitigation is recognized. Carbon reduction and removal credits are accepted.
  • 2035 forward: Mitigation with carbon removal credits is required, with durability matching.

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.

  1. Absolute emissions reduction follows a straight-line emissions trajectory from the target base year to the net-zero year.
  2. Emissions intensity reduction lets companies follow sector-specific pathways designed to reflect the reduction opportunities available in sectors like steel, cement, or chemicals.
  3. 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:

  1. Reducing electricity consumption,
  2. Reducing grid consumption by installing onsite or direct-line offsite clean energy generation, and
  3. 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:

  1. 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;
  2. 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
  3. 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.

  1. Engaged companies address more than 1% of total Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions.
  2. Advanced companies address more than 10% of total Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions, including 100% of Scope 1 and 2 emissions.
  3. 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.

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.

Continue Reading

Carbon Footprint

How to improve Scope 3 data accuracy for CSRD

Published

on

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.

Continue Reading

Carbon Footprint

How community stewardship makes carbon credits durable

Published

on

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?

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com