Lithium, a critical element in modern technology, has become a focal point in discussions about renewable energy and electric vehicles (EVs) due to its importance in batteries. The fluctuating prices of lithium have significant implications for industries and economies worldwide. This article explores the dynamics of lithium pricing, offering insights into historical trends, current market conditions, future predictions, and the key factors that drive its valuation.
Background Information
Lithium is a soft, silvery-white metal belonging to the alkali metal group. It is highly reactive and flammable, making it essential in various industrial applications. Most notably, lithium-ion batteries power everything from smartphones to electric vehicles.
The demand for lithium has surged with the rise of renewable energy technologies and the global push towards reducing carbon emissions. Lithium’s unique properties make it irreplaceable in high-performance batteries, which are pivotal in energy storage solutions and portable electronics.
Lithium is also on several countries’ Critical Minerals lists, such as the U.S., Canada, and Australia.
Historical Lithium Price Trends
Lithium prices have seen dramatic changes over the past decade. From 2010 to 2015, prices remained relatively stable, with minor fluctuations due to steady demand and supply conditions. However, from 2015 onwards, prices began to soar, driven by the booming EV market and increased demand for renewable energy storage solutions.
By 2017, lithium prices had tripled compared to their 2015 levels. This spike was primarily due to the rapid expansion of China’s EV market and increased lithium mining and production investments.
The year 2018 saw prices peaking, but by 2019, an oversupply in the market led to a sharp decline. From 2019 to 2021, prices remained subdued, reflecting a period of market correction and stabilization.
In 2022, however, a record-breaking price rally occurred due to a large supply deficit. Lithium’s largely agreement-based supply model also contributed to this squeeze, sending lithium prices skyrocketing over 5x. This push would continue until midway through the year as China re-implemented full lockdowns nationwide due to rising COVID-19 case numbers, leading to a brief economic slowdown.
While the end of lockdowns coincided with another surge in demand, sending lithium prices to their all-time high of 575,000 CNY (USD 80,000) per tonne, this rally was short-lived. With inflation rates on the rise and EV supply finally overtaking demand, lithium prices plummeted back down in 2023 before stabilizing around the 100,000 CNY (USD 14,000) level, where it continues to trade today.
The past few years have been marked by significant market adjustments. Producers ramped up supply, anticipating continuous high demand, but the market did not grow as quickly as expected.
Consequently, this led to a surplus, driving prices down. Moreover, technological improvements in mining and processing lithium contributed to cost reductions, which also played a role in lowering market prices during this period.
Lithium Price Volatility
One of the main factors contributing to the volatility of lithium prices is that unlike other minerals like gold or copper, the lithium markets are still fairly young and hence the spot market is not very well established. With the recent explosive growth in lithium demand added on top of that, the result is a market sector that’s very much still going through growing pains.
Right now, instead of purchasing contracts for delivery on a spot market most lithium consumers choose to directly sign long-term offtake agreements with lithium miners, securing a guaranteed supply at a fixed price. The current state of the lithium markets has drawn parallels to the iron ore market prior to the 2010s, where pricing would follow an annual benchmark negotiated between miners and steelmakers each year.
In the early 2000s, explosive growth in iron ore demand from China was the catalyst that finally led to change in the iron ore markets. It would take a concerted effort from BHP and other top miners for the iron ore markets to shift towards the spot pricing model it follows today.
Something similar is happening in the lithium markets, with top producer Albemarle having begun holding auctions for its mined lithium since March 2024. These auctions allow buyers to secure pricing that’s more truly reflective of the present supply-demand dynamic, as opposed to being forced to lock in fixed long-term pricing to avoid not having enough supply.
Albemarle plans on holding auctions every two weeks in order to provide more timely and consistent data on lithium pricing.
The lithium spot market has been seeing increasing activity as well, as shown in the chart above. In conclusion, while lithium prices will likely continue to be volatile for the foreseeable future, there are changes under way that will help stabilize the market as it matures and develops.
Current Market Analysis
As of 2024, lithium prices have stabilized from their major plunge of 2022-2023. The current price is attributed to several factors:
- Increased Demand: The global shift towards electrification and decarbonization has accelerated the demand for lithium-ion batteries. EVs, energy storage systems, and consumer electronics continue to drive this demand. The Paris Agreement and other international efforts to curb carbon emissions have further intensified the focus on lithium as a key resource for achieving climate goals.
- Supply Chain Dynamics: While demand is rising, supply chain disruptions have hindered the steady flow of lithium. These disruptions are caused by geopolitical tensions, logistical challenges, and regulatory hurdles in major lithium-producing countries. For instance, political instability in regions like South America, where a significant portion of lithium is mined, has led to production slowdowns and export restrictions. However, there is still a significant surplus of lithium supply to work through.
- Technological Advancements: Innovations in battery technology, such as solid-state batteries, promise higher efficiency and longer life cycles. These advancements have spurred further investment in lithium production, contributing to the current price dynamics. Additionally, advancements in extraction technologies, such as direct lithium extraction (DLE), are expected to enhance the efficiency and environmental sustainability of lithium production.
The increased focus on domestic production in countries like the United States and Australia is also reshaping the market landscape. Efforts to reduce dependence on imported lithium are driving investments in local mining projects, which, in turn, affect global supply and pricing dynamics.
Future Price Predictions
Looking ahead, the future of lithium prices is shaped by a combination of technological, economic, and geopolitical factors.
Analysts predict that demand for lithium will continue to grow, driven by several key trends:
- Expansion of the EV Market: With governments worldwide setting ambitious targets for EV adoption, the demand for lithium is expected to skyrocket. For instance, the European Union aims to phase out internal combustion engine vehicles by 2035, significantly boosting lithium demand. Major automakers are also announcing aggressive plans to electrify their fleets, further driving demand.
- Advancements in Energy Storage: Beyond EVs, the need for efficient energy storage solutions in renewable energy systems will drive lithium demand. Solar and wind energy projects increasingly rely on lithium-ion batteries for energy storage, ensuring a steady demand. The development of grid-scale storage solutions is particularly significant, as it addresses the intermittency issues associated with renewable energy sources.
- Sustainable Mining Practices: The push for sustainable and ethical mining practices may impact the supply side. While this could constrain supply in the short term, it is expected to ensure a stable and environmentally friendly lithium supply in the long run. Innovations in recycling technologies and the development of closed-loop systems are also expected to play a crucial role in meeting future demand sustainably.
Factors Affecting Lithium Prices
Several factors influence lithium prices, creating a complex and dynamic market landscape:
- Supply and Demand Dynamics: The fundamental economics of supply and demand play a crucial role. Any imbalance, such as oversupply or undersupply, directly affects prices. For example, the rapid development of new mining projects can lead to temporary oversupply, depressing prices until demand catches up.
- Geopolitical Factors: Lithium-rich countries, such as Australia, Chile, and Argentina, play a significant role in the global supply chain. Political stability and regulatory policies in these regions can impact lithium prices. Trade policies, tariffs, and international agreements also influence the global flow of lithium and its pricing.
- Technological Developments: Breakthroughs in battery technology can influence lithium demand. For example, the development of alternative battery chemistries could reduce reliance on lithium, affecting its price. Conversely, improvements in lithium extraction and processing technologies can increase supply efficiency and reduce production costs, impacting prices favorably.
- Environmental Regulations: Stricter environmental regulations on mining practices can limit supply and drive up prices. Conversely, advancements in sustainable mining techniques can stabilize prices. The growing emphasis on reducing the environmental footprint of lithium extraction is prompting the industry to adopt greener practices, which may initially increase costs but lead to long-term sustainability.
Key Players in the Lithium Market
The global lithium market is dominated by a few key players who control a significant share of the mined supply. Here are five of the top producers from 2023, who combined for roughly half of total global production:
- Albemarle Corporation: Currently the world’s largest lithium producer, Albemarle operates major lithium mining projects in Australia and the United States. The company has invested heavily in expanding its production capacity to meet rising demand.
- SQM (Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile): Based in Chile, SQM, the world’s second largest producer, is known for its extensive lithium brine operations in the Atacama Desert. The company has leveraged its strategic location and technological expertise to become a dominant player in the market.
- Ganfeng Lithium: A Chinese company, Ganfeng is a major player in the lithium market, with operations spanning from mining to battery production. The company’s vertically integrated business model allows it to control the entire supply chain, ensuring stable supply and competitive pricing.
- Tianqi Lithium: Another Chinese giant, Tianqi, has significant stakes in lithium mining operations globally, including the Greenbushes mine in Australia. The company’s strategic investments and partnerships have positioned it as a key supplier in the global market.
- Arcadium Lithium: A vertically integrated lithium company formed from a merger between American refiner Livent and Australian miner Allkem, Arcadium focuses on high-quality lithium compounds used in batteries and other applications. The company’s commitment to innovation and sustainability has made it a preferred supplier for many high-tech industries.
Challenges and Opportunities
The lithium market faces several challenges and opportunities that will shape its future:
Challenges:
- Environmental Impact: Lithium mining has significant environmental repercussions, including water usage and habitat destruction. Addressing these concerns is crucial for sustainable growth. The industry is under increasing scrutiny to minimize its environmental footprint and adopt greener practices. Expect to see a more pronounced price premium for “green” sustainable lithium once the market matures further.
- Market Volatility: Fluctuations in supply and demand combined with the infancy of the lithium markets can lead to volatile prices, making it challenging for investors and producers to plan long-term strategies. The cyclical nature of commodity markets adds to the unpredictability, requiring robust risk management practices.
- Technological Risks: Dependence on lithium-ion technology poses a risk if alternative battery technologies emerge, potentially reducing lithium demand. The rapid pace of technological innovation necessitates continuous adaptation and investment in research and development.
Opportunities:
- Technological Innovation: Advancements in mining and processing technologies can enhance efficiency and reduce environmental impact. Innovations such as direct lithium extraction (DLE) and improved recycling techniques are expected to revolutionize the industry.
- Strategic Investments: Investing in lithium recycling and alternative sources can diversify supply and stabilize the market. Developing secondary sources of lithium, such as extracting lithium from geothermal brines or recycling used batteries, offers promising avenues for ensuring supply security.
- Global Collaboration: International cooperation on sustainable mining practices and environmental regulations can ensure a stable and ethical lithium supply chain. Collaborative efforts among governments, industry players, and environmental organizations can drive the adoption of best practices and foster a resilient market.
Types of Lithium Companies: Technology, Exploration, Production, Extraction, Refining
The lithium industry comprises various types of companies, each playing a crucial role in the supply chain. These companies can be broadly categorized into technology, exploration, production, extraction, and refining. Understanding the distinct roles and contributions of each type is essential for grasping the complexity of the lithium market.
-
Technology Companies
Role and Contribution: Technology companies are pivotal in the development and advancement of lithium battery technologies. These firms focus on enhancing the performance, efficiency, and safety of lithium-ion batteries. Innovations by technology companies drive the demand for lithium by creating new applications and improving existing ones.
Examples:
- Tesla: Known for its electric vehicles (EVs), Tesla also invests heavily in battery technology through its Gigafactories, which produce lithium-ion batteries for both EVs and energy storage systems.
- Panasonic: Partnering with Tesla, Panasonic manufactures lithium-ion batteries, focusing on improving energy density and reducing costs.
Impact: Technology companies push the boundaries of battery capabilities, influencing the overall demand for high-quality lithium and driving advancements that make renewable energy solutions more viable and efficient.
-
Exploration Companies
Role and Contribution: Exploration companies are responsible for discovering new lithium deposits. These firms conduct geological surveys, drilling, and sampling to identify potential lithium reserves. Exploration is the first step in the lithium supply chain, determining future supply availability.
Examples:
- LiFT Power Corp: An exploration company focused on developing its lithium project in Northwest Territories, Canada, aiming to establish a domestic North American supply of lithium.
Impact: Successful exploration leads to the development of new lithium mines, increasing the global supply of lithium and potentially stabilizing prices. These companies are crucial for ensuring a steady pipeline of lithium resources to meet future demand.
-
Production Companies
Role and Contribution: Production companies are involved in the extraction of lithium from mines and brine sources. They manage the operations of lithium mines and are responsible for bringing raw lithium materials to the market.
Examples:
- Albemarle Corporation: The world’s largest lithium producer in 2023 with operations in Australia and the USA, Albemarle is a key supplier of lithium compounds to various industries.
- SQM (Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile): Operating extensive lithium brine extraction facilities in the Atacama Desert, SQM is a leading global producer of lithium.
Impact: Production companies are the backbone of the lithium supply chain, ensuring that sufficient quantities of lithium are available to meet industrial and consumer needs. Their production capacities and efficiencies directly influence lithium prices and availability.
-
Extraction Companies
Role and Contribution: Extraction companies specialize in the technologies and processes used to extract lithium from raw materials. These firms develop and implement methods for efficiently and sustainably extracting lithium from both hard rock (spodumene) and brine sources.
Examples:
- Standard Lithium: Known for its proprietary extraction technology that aims to streamline the lithium extraction process and increase efficiency.
Impact: Advancements in extraction technology by these companies can significantly lower production costs and environmental impact, making lithium more accessible and sustainable. Efficient extraction processes are essential for meeting growing demand while minimizing ecological footprints.
-
Refining Companies
Role and Contribution: Refining companies are responsible for processing raw lithium materials into high-purity lithium compounds that are suitable for use in batteries and other applications. These companies ensure that the lithium meets stringent quality standards required by technology and battery manufacturers.
Examples:
- Ganfeng Lithium: A vertically integrated company that not only mines lithium but also refines it into battery-grade compounds.
- Tianqi Lithium: Engages in refining lithium to produce battery-grade lithium hydroxide and carbonate, supplying major battery manufacturers.
Impact: Refining companies add value by transforming raw lithium into a usable form, ensuring a consistent supply of high-quality lithium to downstream industries. Their operations are critical for maintaining the supply chain’s integrity and meeting the specifications required for advanced lithium-ion batteries.
Conclusion
Lithium prices are influenced by a myriad of factors, from technological advancements and supply chain dynamics to geopolitical and environmental considerations. The future of lithium pricing looks promising, with growing demand driven by the global shift towards electrification and renewable energy.
However, addressing the challenges of sustainable production and market volatility will be crucial for long-term stability. As the world continues to embrace green technologies, lithium remains a critical component in the journey towards a sustainable future.
References and Further Reading
- Lithium Market Overview and Trends. (2023). International Energy Agency. https://www.iea.org/reports/critical-minerals-market-review-2023/key-market-trends#abstract.
- The Future of Lithium: Supply, Demand, and Prices. (2023). BloombergNEF (https://about.bnef.com/blog/the-future-of-lithium-supply-demand-and-pr)
The post Understanding Lithium Prices: Past, Present, and Future appeared first on Carbon Credits.
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