Although challenges remain, the new EU Nature Restoration Law champions biodiversity, climate goals, and offers exciting opportunities through instruments such as voluntary biodiversity credit markets.
This article highlights the challenges to net zero as well as the central role investors and executives play in our economy’s evolution.
In this episode of ClimateTalks we meet Verra to discuss how they are facilitating a sustainable transition through carbon offsetting.
In this article we will explore the key differences between carbon removal vs. carbon avoidance and tell you how to choose between them.
The SBTi sees carbon credits as a valid tool within BVCM strategies for achieving near-term emissions reductions. The SBTi has released two new reports to equip companies with the knowledge and tools needed to design and implement effective Beyond Value Chain Mitigation (BVCM) strategies. These reports aim to mobilize increased corporate action towards tackling climate change. Above and Beyond: An SBTi report on the design and implementation of BVCM. This report provides a comprehensive guide for companies on crafting and executing BVCM strategies. Raising the Bar: An SBTi report on accelerating corporate adoption of BVCM. This report explores the broader ecosystem of climate action stakeholders, It examines the factors that incentivize or hinder corporate adoption of BVCM. What is Beyond Value Chain Mitigation (BVCM) and why does it matter? Businesses can now take their climate action to the next level and accelerate progress towards net-zero emissions with the Science Based Targets initiative’s (SBTi) Beyond Value Chain Mitigation (BVCM) strategies. BVCM goes beyond a company’s direct operations, allowing them to invest in emissions reductions or removals happening elsewhere. This could involve funding renewable energy projects, protecting forests, or developing new technologies that capture and store carbon. By participating in BVCM, companies can significantly amplify their environmental impact and become true leaders in the fight against climate change. Setting science based targets to reduce emissions Science-based targets show businesses how much and how quickly they need to reduce their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to prevent the worst effects of climate change. The Science Based Targets initiative is an organization that exists to support ambitious corporate climate action, ensuring that targets and approaches being carried out are verifiable and in line with the Paris Agreement goals. More than 4,000 businesses around the world are already working with the (SBTi). In their recent report, Raising the Bar: An SBTi report on accelerating corporate adoption of BVCM, the SBTI makes it clear that high-quality carbon credits are a definitive tool to help organizations reduce carbon emissions, beyond their own value chain and working alongside VCMI’s claim’s code of practice companies can confidently purchase high-quality carbon credits. The SBTi stance, are carbon credits a net-zero shortcut? In short. No. SBTi stands behind carbon offsetting so long as carbon credits purchased are high quality, verified and traceable. Here’s exactly what they say in their latest report: BVCM is defined as mitigation action or investments that fall outside a company’s value chain, including activities that avoid or reduce GHG emissions, or remove and store GHGs from the atmosphere. It is included as a recommendation in the SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard. Companies can fund beyond value chain mitigation through a range of instruments such as the purchase and retirement of high-quality carbon credits and direct investments (e.g., equity, debt or project finance). The SBTi highlights the importance of delivering near-term mitigation outcomes as well as providing funding for innovation and enabling activities to scale climate solutions and unlock future mitigation. Near-term mitigation outcomes can be funded through the purchase and retirement of carbon credits, while funding for innovation and enabling activities for future mitigation to occur would typically be provided via other instruments. Supporting your 4-Step process: Where ClimateTrade can help SBTi have outlined four high-level steps for designing and implementing high-integrity and high-impact BVCM strategies. These are: Step 1: set and work to deliver a net-zero target Step 2: establish a BVCM pledge Step 3: take action to deliver BVCM Step 4: report BVCM activities and outcomes Our team at ClimateTrade can actively support you throughout this process, particularly steps 3 and 4. Regarding step 3, SBTI says: Have BVCM mitigation outcomes verified by an independent third party that assesses the accuracy and completeness of an emissions reduction or removal intervention. Where carbon credits are the mechanism for deploying BVCM, credits should be verified by an independent third party to the protocols of a high-quality carbon standard. At ClimateTrade we only work with the industry’s leading registries, who align themselves with associations such as Voluntary Carbon Market Integrity Initiative (VCMI) and their claims code of practice. SBTi axes net zero commitments of 200+ companies While many companies are committed to pursuing net-zero emissions through the Business Value Chain Model (BVCM) strategy, the path is proving difficult. Just last week, the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) removed the net-zero pledges of over 239 organizations because they failed to submit concrete targets for validation within a two-year window. These companies have publicly reaffirmed their commitment to net-zero, but they’re struggling to meet the specific requirements set by SBTi. This situation highlights the challenges companies face in translating their BVCM ambitions into achievable SBTi-validated targets. Carbon offsetting and greenwashing concerns A major hurdle for companies considering Beyond Value Chain Mitigation (BVCM) is the fear of being accused of “greenwashing.” Greenwashing describes companies that portray themselves as more environmentally conscious than they actually are. In the context of BVCM, companies worry that exceeding science-based emission reduction targets through BVCM initiatives might be misinterpreted. Stakeholders might see this as simply paying to offset their pollution elsewhere, rather than focusing on genuine reductions within their own operations. This concern is backed by data: a 2023 survey found that 35% of respondents (29 out of 83 companies) cited the fear of greenwashing as a key barrier to spending more on carbon credits, a core element of BVCM strategies. This fear extends beyond carbon credits, with 20% of companies not involved in other BVCM funding mechanisms citing greenwashing concerns as a key reason. Ultimately, this fear of greenwashing is hindering not only the voluntary carbon market, but also global initiatives working tirelessly to improve and restore our planet’s health. With so much at stake, it’s crucial for companies to develop robust safeguarding solutions. These solutions should verify climate claims and ensure green financing is fully traceable and accountable. Only then can companies confidently embrace BVCM and contribute to a more sustainable future. Partner with ClimateTrade to develop your offsetting strategy Businesses hold immense power to
It is possible to find carbon credits that offer a balance between cost and impact, but it’s crucial to ensure the credits meet high-quality standards.
Groundbreaking corporate forests initiative, giving companies a unique opportunity to grow their own forest.
As climate concerns escalate, the need for hotel businesses to prioritize sustainable hospitality is increasing.
The journey towards a Net Zero world is long and arduous – and it probably shouldn’t be done by plane. Aviation is considered one of the hardest sectors to decarbonize: read this article to find out why. Aviation’s contribution to climate change Global aviation, which includes passenger and freight planes, is responsible for almost 2% of greenhouse gas emissions, and 2.5% of CO2 emissions (around 1 billion tons in 2018). That’s much less than road transportation (11.9% of GHG) or even livestock (5.8%). But the effect of these emissions is made worse by the collateral impacts of flying. According to Our World in Data, “as well as emitting CO2 from burning fuel, planes affect the concentration of other gases and pollutants in the atmosphere. They result in a short-term increase, but long-term decrease in ozone (O3); a decrease in methane (CH4); emissions of water vapour; soot; sulfur aerosols; and water contrails. While some of these impacts result in warming, others induce a cooling effect. Overall, the warming effect is stronger.” In the end, the aviation sector is considered responsible for 3.5% of global warming. Alternative fuels to decarbonize aviation Fuel is the biggest contributor to the carbon footprint of air travel. Removing emissions from aviation fuel would contribute to a 65% reduction in carbon emissions from the sector, according to the International Air Transport Association (IATA). Sustainable Aviation Fuel Currently, the only alternative to kerosene, the preferred fuel for planes, is Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF), essentially a bioful that can be made from almost any type of waste (plants, cooking oil, used clothes, etc). While burning these products results in CO2 emissions, SAF presents a reduction in lifecycle emissions of up to 80% compared to traditional fuel. This is because it is partly made from plants, which absorb CO2 to grow, and partly because it avoids greenhouse gas emissions from landfill or waste treatment. Additionally, SAF cannot be made from materials that would divert land use from food production, or from the products of deforestation. One of the advantages of SAF is that it can be mixed with regular fuels to lower the carbon footprint of flights without having to modify planes’ engines. However, SAF can be up to eight times more expensive than kerosene, which makes it cost-prohibitive in many cases. Green hydrogen The other alternative to kerosene is green hydrogen, a technology that is still under development but would remove 100% of fuel-based emissions from air travel. Hydrogen is a zero-emissions fuel that can be produced from different sources: brown hydrogen is made by burning coal, defeating its zero-emissions purpose; and blue hydrogen is made from fossil fuel, with CO2 sequestration integrated into the process (this is currently considered the best option for reducing emissions at a reasonable cost). Green hydrogen is the real game-changer, as it is made through the electrolysis water using renewable energy. Its production has almost no impact on the environment, making it the most sustainable option for aviation. Green hydrogen is still very expensive to produce, but its cost is reducing as renewable energy is becoming cheaper and demand for eletrolyzers is increasing. Hydrogen engines are different from fossil fuel engines, but airlines are already piloting hydrogen planes: Airbus’ ZEROe aims to be the first zero-emission commercial aircraft. It is estimated that hydrogen will enter aviation’s fuel mix in the 2030s. Carbon offsetting for aviation The aviation sector needs to support the development of zero-emission fuels through investment and demand signals, in order to make them more affordable. But in the meantime, the best option for the industry is to offset the carbon footprint associated with air travel. ClimateTrade offers an API that can be integrated into flight reservation platforms to give travelers the option to offset the carbon emissions of their flights. The API is connected to the ClimateTrade marketplace, where more than 60 certified carbon mitigation projects are available. All transactions are conducted through blockchain technology, giving customers end-to-end visibility of where and how their money is used. This traceability greatly improves both the positive impact of carbon offsetting, and the transparency of communication with travelers. Check out the pilot project we conducted with Iberia. For more information, visit our marketplace or contact us.