• About
    • Which Energy Mix is this?
  • Climate News Network Archive
  • Contact
The climate news that makes a difference.
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
No Result
View All Result
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
  FEATURED
Danske Bank Quits New Fossil Fuel Financing January 23, 2023
Extreme Warming Ahead Even as Worst-Case Scenarios Grow ‘Obsolete’ January 23, 2023
Notley Scorches Federal Just Transition Bill as Fossil CEO Calls for Oilsands Boom January 23, 2023
IRON OXIDE: New Battery Brings Long-Duration Storage to Grids, 750 Jobs to West Virginia January 23, 2023
BREAKING: GFANZ Banks, Investors Pour Hundreds of Billions into Fossil Fuels January 17, 2023
Next
Prev

Carney Walks Back Net-Zero Claim, SBTi Faces Criticism as Corporate Carbon Plans Draw Closer Scrutiny

March 1, 2021
Reading time: 4 minutes

Policy Exchange/Wikimedia Commons

Policy Exchange/Wikimedia Commons

 

Two of the biggest sources of optimism on corporations’ momentum toward serious carbon reductions are receiving pushback, with ex-Bank of Canada governor Mark Carney forced to walk back a net-zero claim for a major investment portfolio and the Science-Based Targets Initiative (SBTi) under fire for its choice of assessment methods.

Carney, now a UN special envoy on climate finance and vice-chair of Toronto-based Brookfield Asset Management, spurred a backlash with a February 10 claim that the fund’s US$600-billion portfolio had already brought its emissions to net-zero, Bloomberg Green reports. SBTi, meanwhile, is taking heat from a former technical advisor who says the group rejected the method for setting corporate climate targets that “offered the lowest risk of an under or overshoot of the global carbon budget,” Climate Home News writes.

  • Concise headlines. Original content. Timely news and views from a select group of opinion leaders. Special extras.
  • Everything you need, nothing you don’t.
  • The Weekender: The climate news you need.
New!
Subscribe

“Brookfield is in a position today where we are net-zero,” Carney told Bloomberg Live last month, in what Bloomberg Green describes as a reference to all the company’s assets. “The reason we’re net-zero is that we have this enormous renewables business,” so that “all the avoided emissions that come with that” compensated for the climate impacts of its other investments.

Brookfield’s sprawling portfolio, the biggest in Canada, includes investments in coal and other fossil fuels. The company is also engaged in an elaborate hostile takeover bid for a Calgary-based pipeline company, with analysts pointing to a petrochemical plant as one of its prime assets. 

But “the backlash from climate experts hinged on Carney’s use of ‘avoided emissions’, in which a company takes credit for refraining from high-polluting actions,” Bloomberg writes. “An investment in wind turbines might be claimed as avoiding an investment in the same amount of energy produced by coal”. But “experts had pushed back against his [February 10] comments for misrepresenting what’s required to cut an investor’s climate impact,” while SBTi “does not count avoided emissions in its framework”.

“Most large asset managers have a renewable energy fund,” said Ben Caldecott, director of the University of Oxford’s Sustainable Finance Program. “Simply having one does not make you net-zero.”

On Friday, Carney said that “I have always been—and will continue to be—a strong advocate for net-zero science-based targets, and I also recognize that avoided emissions do not count towards them.”

But while Bloomberg says SBTi is “widely regarded as the gold standard for climate plans,” former advisor Bill Baue published a formal complaint last week, telling Climate Home that “Science-Based Targets is not a science-based approach”.

The stakes in the argument are high. Launched in 2015 to “set the standard for companies to align with the goals of the Paris Agreement”, Climate Home says, SBTi now works with more than 1,000 companies across 50 sectors that control about $20.5 trillion in assets, nearly 20% of global market capitalization.

But the calculations aren’t simple. “SBTi’s proposition is that it works with companies to develop and approve targets and strategies to cut emissions in line with 1.5C°—the toughest Paris goal,” Climate Home explains. “That involves a number of hidden assumptions. The size of the global carbon budget for 1.5°C depends on how much carbon dioxide you expect to remove from the atmosphere and the temperature ‘overshoot’ tolerated mid-century. Then there are judgement calls about how to share the shrinking carbon budget between sectors and geographies.”

With seven possible methodologies on offer, Baue said SBTi initially accepted an approach developed by the U.S.-based Center for Sustainable Organizations (CSO), before dropping it from its toolkit.

As a result, “SBTi now finds itself in what we might call an ‘inconvenient’ position of recommending against the very methodology that is the most robust!” he wrote in his complaint.

“A rigorous, science-based approach is at the very core of the SBTi’s work and we take extremely seriously our role in upholding this,” the initiative replied in a message to Climate Home. “This is why our methodologies undergo strict evaluation each year, to ensure they are in line with the latest climate science.”

SBTi added that “our mission is to drive down corporate emissions for a net-zero, 1.5°C world, and this goal ultimately is at the heart of our decision-making.”

But Concordia University researcher Anders Bjørn, former SBTi advisory board member Jed Davis, and Greenpeace International Executive Director Jennifer Morgan all expressed concern about what Climate Home calls the “opaque vetting process” for the initiative’s coveted “science-based” label.

“To quell the great public skepticism about this initiative, what’s needed is an additional emphasis on transparency and accountability, using the latest science to guide these targets, and for these companies to back up their targets with their investment plans,” Morgan said.



in Carbon Levels & Measurement, Climate & Society, Community Climate Finance, Ending Emissions, International Agencies & Studies

The latest climate news and analysis, direct to your inbox

Subscribe

Related Posts

RL0919/wikimedia commons
Finance & Investment

Danske Bank Quits New Fossil Fuel Financing

January 23, 2023
2k
@tongbingxue/Twitter
Ending Emissions

Extreme Warming Ahead Even as Worst-Case Scenarios Grow ‘Obsolete’

January 23, 2023
238
Rachel Notley/Facebook
Jobs & Training

Notley Scorches Federal Just Transition Bill as Fossil CEO Calls for Oilsands Boom

January 23, 2023
234

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I agree to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

Trending Stories

RL0919/wikimedia commons

Danske Bank Quits New Fossil Fuel Financing

January 23, 2023
2k
Weirton, WV by Jon Dawson/flickr

IRON OXIDE: New Battery Brings Long-Duration Storage to Grids, 750 Jobs to West Virginia

January 23, 2023
476
Rachel Notley/Facebook

Notley Scorches Federal Just Transition Bill as Fossil CEO Calls for Oilsands Boom

January 23, 2023
234
EcoAnalytics

Albertans Want a Just Transition, Despite Premier’s Grumbling

January 23, 2023
180
@tongbingxue/Twitter

Extreme Warming Ahead Even as Worst-Case Scenarios Grow ‘Obsolete’

January 23, 2023
238
Massachusetts Clean Energy Center/flickr

1.5°C Is Doable. The Barriers Are All Political.

January 16, 2023
360

Recent Posts

Sergio Boscaino/flickr

Dubai Mulls Quitting C40 Cities Over ‘Costly’ Climate Target

January 24, 2023
78
hangela/pixabay

New UK Coal Mine Faces Two Legal Challenges

January 24, 2023
40

Gas Stoves Enter U.S. Climate Culture War, Become ‘Bellwether’ for Industry

January 22, 2023
70
Jeff Hitchcock/flickr.

BREAKING: GFANZ Banks, Investors Pour Hundreds of Billions into Fossil Fuels

January 23, 2023
487

Exxon Had the Right Global Warming Numbers Through Decades of Denial: Study

January 17, 2023
223
willenhallwench / Pixabay

Ontario Greenwashes with ‘Misleading, Illegitimate’ Emission Credits

January 16, 2023
308
Next Post
Martin Falbisoner/Wikimedia Commons

Maryland Capital and Its County Launch New Climate Suits Against Big Fossil

The Energy Mix - The climate news you need

Copyright 2023 © Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

  • About
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy and Copyright
  • Cookie Policy

Proudly partnering with…

scf_withtagline
No Result
View All Result
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities

Copyright 2022 © Smarter Shift Inc. and Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

Manage Cookie Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Manage options Manage services Manage vendors Read more about these purposes
View preferences
{title} {title} {title}