85% of businesses lagging behind on Scope 3 emissions targets Carbon emissions from corporate supply chains are 26 times higher than their operational emissions, according to a new study. Boston Consulting Group (BCG) and CDP joined forces to conduct the report ‘Scope 3 Upstream: Big Challenges, Simple Remedies’ which showed supply chain emissions continue to be overlooked with a sharper focus on measuring Scope 1 and 2 in the manufacturing, retails and materials sectors. Corporates are twice as likely to do this than measure their supply chain emissions. Click here to read the full article: https://lnkd.in/g9E9SFkg #emissions #sustainability #climateaction
Acre’s Post
More Relevant Posts
-
managing director europe | bcorp | creating sustainable change by enabling businesses to make a true impact | born at 330.21 ppm
85% of businesses lagging behind on Scope 3 emissions targets Carbon emissions from corporate supply chains are 26 times higher than their operational emissions, according to a new study. Boston Consulting Group (BCG) and CDP joined forces to conduct the report ‘Scope 3 Upstream: Big Challenges, Simple Remedies’ which showed supply chain emissions continue to be overlooked with a sharper focus on measuring Scope 1 and 2 in the manufacturing, retails and materials sectors. Corporates are twice as likely to do this than measure their supply chain emissions. Click here to read the full article: https://lnkd.in/g9E9SFkg #emissions #sustainability #climateaction
85 per cent of businesses lagging behind on Scope 3 emissions targets | Acre
acre.com
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
🫴🌱 Have you ever wondered how your organisation can engage with carbon markets? Is your business looking to reduce their emissions? Check out this post and in-depth blog from CORE Markets 🗺️ Both useful resources for those on the journey to #netzero https://lnkd.in/gDJ6DJNT #EmissionsReduction #ClimateChange #SustainabilityLeaders
While emissions reductions must be a priority, organisations across all sectors, especially in hard-to-abate industries should actively plan for how to manage their residual emissions. 🏭 This process can take place as part of decarbonisation strategy planning, which should include modelling of unavoidable, residual emissions over time. ⏰ Understanding the organisation’s emissions position early allows sustainability leaders to explore and model various carbon sourcing options, beyond those available for immediate purchase on the spot market. 💲In our advisory work, we’re seeing many organisations embracing innovative ways of ensuring access to high-quality carbon credits at the right price. We have outlined the key carbon procurement options we explore with our customers in the graphic below. 👇 This topic is discussed further in our recent blog - How to avoid the carbon credit crunch: Mitigating financial risk. 🔗 You can read this in full via the link in comments. 🗨️ As always, let us know your thoughts on this blog in the comments. Let's learn and grow together on the journey towards net zero. #CarbonMarkets #EmissionsReduction #ClimateChange #SustainabilityLeaders
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
Ensuring Your Path to Net Zero by 2040 with High-Quality Carbon Credits Companies that wait until the late 2030s to purchase carbon credits for mitigation are unlikely to reach net zero by 2040 due to supply constraints in high-quality segments of the voluntary carbon market. It's crucial to act now, with a focus on Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) and precision quantification for GHG accounting, ongoing monitoring, and stringent standards in alignment with the Core Carbon Principles of the ICVCM. Steps to Procure High-Quality Carbon Credits: 1️⃣ Understand Your Company’s Carbon Footprint and Glidepath - Conduct a thorough assessment of your current emissions and establish a reduction trajectory. 2️⃣ Decide How to Procure Credits - Explore various procurement strategies, considering both short-term and long-term needs. 3️⃣ Choose What Voluntary Carbon Market Segments to Prioritize - Focus on segments that offer high integrity and robust CDR solutions. 4️⃣ Develop Mechanisms for Project Origination and Contracting - Establish clear processes for sourcing and securing carbon credits, ensuring alignment with your sustainability goals. 5️⃣ Conduct Project-Level Due Diligence - Perform rigorous evaluations of potential projects to verify their quality and impact. 6️⃣ Establish Use Cases and Guardrails - Define clear use cases for your carbon credits and implement guardrails to ensure proper usage and compliance. 7️⃣ Receive and Retire Credits - Follow best practices for credit acquisition, retirement, and documentation to maintain transparency and accountability. 8️⃣ Measure Progress - Continuously monitor and report on the impact of your carbon credits to track progress towards your net-zero goals. 9️⃣ Learn and Improve - Regularly review outcomes, learn from experiences, and refine strategies to enhance your carbon management efforts. By following these steps, your company can secure high-quality carbon credits now, ensuring a clear and accountable path to net zero. Don't wait – start your journey today with Trusted Carbon. #NetZero #CarbonCredits #Sustainability #CDR #GHGAccounting #CoreCarbonPrinciples #TrustedCarbon
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
Guidehouse Life Sciences, Client Relationship Executive | Leading our Sustainability (ESG), Commercial Transformation, and Risk & Compliance service offerings across the life sciences industry.
Scope 3 supply chain emissions are, on average, 26 times greater than emissions from corporates’ direct operations (Scope 1 and 2), with upstream emissions from the manufacturing, retail and materials sectors 1.4 times the total of CO2 emitted in the EU in 2022. While having a larger impact, corporates are half as likely to measure supply chain emissions as operational emissions. Three factors correlate with action on Scope 3 upstream emissions: 1) A climate-responsible board, which makes corporates 4.8 times more likely to have a Scope 3 target and a 1.5°C-aligned transition plan. 2) Supplier engagement programs, increasing likelihood 6.6 times. 3) Adoption of internal carbon pricing, increasing likelihood 4.1 times. https://lnkd.in/epHSmq5k
Corporates’ supply chain scope 3 emissions are 26 times higher than their operational emissions
cdp.net
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
📢 📢 for the folks in the back (psst...this is what we're working on MillPont - adaptable, reliable, and scalable infrastructure for comprehensive and rapid comparison of claims between all participating markets in commodity supply chains) "Governance and Accounting are where to put resources....Brands are willing to invest, but need to know claims are not double counted and provide sufficient flexibility to navigate complex procurement and supply chain challenges...This is where we invest a ton of time and resources, and is the key to scaling effective programs. Crucially, we design governance structures that are resilient to change, but adaptive to the context of a given supply chain and its stakeholders." As always, 👏 👏 The Climate Source providing timely and pertinent information to all stakeholders = must read material over the holiday break!
Thanks for all of the engagement on our first post with Carbon Yield on lessons from Ag Supply Chain Decarbonization! Benjamin Filippo, Sam Schiller, Claire Pluard, and I have appreciated the feedback. Check out our next installment... 2nd Rule of Thumb Quantification challenges are not a barrier to action. We have good enough tools, sure they are going to get better (ask us about the exciting ones that are in the wings!), but directionally we know what works and have plenty of sure-bet #decarbonization solutions ready to roll. We cannot let quantification inhale the lion share of the budget set aside for #ghg incentives, nor do we have to accept coarse emissions factors that tell us very little about the implementation of a specific project. What we do start to know is what variables matter the most, and what variables just take up space and time on a producer survey. We can focus on the biggest emissions sources, the data that impact those sources most directly, the critical inputs that are hard to observe from a satellite model, and the variables related to meaningful departures from business as usual. That gives us more than enough to move a project forward, stand behind impact, and even recalculate in the future if better tools can reduce our uncertainty on the range of impact actually generated. 3rd Rule of Thumb Governance and Accounting are where to put resources Producers are willing to make changes, share data, and contribute to decarbonization, but they need to know their needs are protected, real value is being put on the table, risks are shared, and compensation is based on factors they can control. Brands are willing to invest, but need to know claims are not double counted and provide sufficient flexibility to navigate complex procurement and supply chain challenges. These are fundamentally governance questions. This is where we invest a ton of time and resources, and is the key to scaling effective programs. Crucially, we design governance structures that are resilient to change, but adaptive to the context of a given supply chain and its stakeholders. #decarbonization #governancematters #supplychainsustainability #scope3emissions
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
Interesting to see many (food) companies setting or asking their suppliers for #SBTi-commitments. 'OK, let's dive into this', might be the first response. But then you have two options; #absolute or #intensity based carbon targets. Both have advantages and disadvantages, but I have a strong favour for the latter. Here's why: - Intensity-based targets allow for a business to grow (despite the green growth discussion), like a new production line, merger or acquisition, expansion to another sector or country. - Intensity-based targets show the % #reduction compared to a fixed economic metric, like tons output, purchasing value or EUR turnover. - By making a transparant equation with an economic metric, it allows for multidisciplinary action mode to do a better job. This makes it easier for management to cascade carbon targets into the organisation. - Intensity-based target allow for cross company comparisons, ie x tCO2e / EUR turnover or per meal served. - It allows for a much simpler comparison and transparency over time which is important with new #greenclaims legislation popping up. Much more can be said and curious to learn your thoughts. Please note any reduction target in line with the #ParisGoals are the way to go, but if you go down that path, we should be considerate in taking the one that matches your business best. Read this article for more in-depth info. https://lnkd.in/eqnq67mP
Absolute vs intensity based carbon targets – The lowdown
sweep.net
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
Are emission targets just a PR stunt? Increasingly UK companies are realising their ambitious targets may be out of their reach, impacting the ability of the UK to hit net zero in 2050. Kajzer-Hughes from Bain and Company suggests, in order to succeed, businesses should see emission targets as an opportunity for growth, not a tick-in-the-box exercise. Of a sample of UK companies, 31% are forecast to miss their targets, partially due to missing Scope 3 emission targets – emissions more difficult to calculate due to their indirect nature. Increasing data availability, especially for those smaller cogs in the mechanism, is becoming increasingly important in order for target feasibility to be calculated. Frameworks such as Science Based Target initiatives can be used to verify targets and set out the pathway to meeting those targets. They also answer the question of credibility, which is a critical point from an investor perspective. Ultimately, this all depends on whether executives are appropriately motivated and incentivised and that investors will recognise and respond to the target being reached. To achieve the latter, companies will need to be very clear about answering questions like; how meaningful will the reduction in the company’s negative impacts actually be? Will the company actually see any commercial benefit? Will the company’s costs be reduced or increased if the target is hit? These are the sorts of questions executives need to consider before committing to reduction targets. #capitalmarkets #decarbonisation #ESG #sustainability
Get emissions down, but do it like you mean it
thetimes.co.uk
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
It's becoming increasingly crucial for businesses of all sizes to grasp their emissions profile🌍🔍. Beyond the imperative to reduce emissions and contribute to the global effort to achieve net zero, carbon emissions are now a key factor in procurement decisions. Large corporations are under mounting pressure to account for their indirect “Scope 3” supply chain emissions to comply with regulations such as the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (#CSDDD) and the International Financial Reporting Standards (#IFRS). These businesses need detailed emissions data from their suppliers to meet these regulatory requirements. By understanding and managing your emissions, you not only play a vital role in environmental sustainability but also enhance your business's attractiveness to larger companies looking to build compliant, responsible supply chains. Join us in the journey towards a more sustainable future. Learn more about how we can help your business step towards net zero. https://loom.ly/B4BpYro #Sustainability #NetZero #CarbonEmissions #Scope3 #SupplyChain #CSDDD #IFRS #BusinessResponsibility #ClimateAction
Get Your GHG Emissions Measured | Achilles Carbon Calculator
https://www.achilles.com
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
Companies have to work on their supply chain in order to reduce scope 3 emissions. Don’t forget that each company is part of the supple chain of another. Those who don’t react can or will exposed to a business impact. Time to start working on it and become early adopters. They will be the winners of tomorrow. Partnership for Carbon Accounting Financials (PCAF) #supplychain #sustainability #carbonreduction #climatechange
The Scope 3 challenge: Solutions across the materials value chain
mckinsey.com
To view or add a comment, sign in
65,013 followers