Employees at SBTi have called for their CEO to resign over controversial plans which they fear will enable greenwashing
Staff at one of the world’s leading
climate-certification organisations have called for the CEO and board
members to resign after they announced plans to allow companies to meet
their climate targets with carbon offsets.
They
fear that companies will use the offsets for greenwashing, while
avoiding making the necessary cuts in greenhouse gas emissions – without
which the world faces climate catastrophe.
The UN-backed Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi),
which certifies whether a company is on track to help limit global
heating to under 1.5C, has validated hundreds of net zero plans from
companies including J Sainsbury plc, John Lewis and Maersk. Until now,
the SBTi has ruled out the use of carbon offsets, instead emphasising
the importance of deep greenhouse gas emissions cuts.
But on Tuesday, the SBTi board of trustees released
plans to allow carbon credits in their net zero standard by permitting
companies to use them to offset emissions from their supply chains,
known as scope 3 emissions.
The
board said there was “ongoing healthy debate on the subject”, but that
“when properly supported by policies, standards and procedures based on
scientific evidence”, the use of offsets in supply chains could be “an
additional tool to tackle climate change”, and so it had decided to
extend their use. They said a draft of the new rules would be published
by July.
The announcement was met with fury by
many SBTi staff and advisers, who say they were not consulted on the
decision and that the move is not based on science.
In
a letter to management seen by the Guardian, they called for the
statement to be withdrawn, and for the resignation of CEO Luiz Fernando
do Amaral and any board members who supported the decision.
The statement read: “We stand ready to support any
efforts aimed at ensuring that the SBTi does not become a greenwashing
platform where decisions are unduly influenced by lobbyists, driven by
potential conflicts of interest and poor adherence to existing
governance procedures. In the event that our concerns are not addressed,
SBTi staff will have no choice but to take further action.”
The SBTi did not respond to request for comment.
The
announcement from SBTi’s board of trustees was widely celebrated by
carbon market proponents, who say the move could increase demand for
offsets. Advocates for carbon markets say that a scaled-up system could
help generate much-needed finance for the global south to fund
climate-change mitigation and adaptation.
But
scientific studies into popular offsetting schemes have found that, in
practice, many do almost nothing to limit global heating. It is often
unclear how much money from the sale of offsets makes it to communities
on the ground.
Ben Rattenbury, a policy analyst at data provider Sylvera, said the move was “a very big deal” for the carbon markets.
“The world can’t afford this transition without
carbon credits, so it’s very encouraging to see SBTi open the door for
companies to be able to use them for a proportion of their scope 3
emissions reductions targets – while respecting the mitigation
hierarchy,” he said.
Reacting to the move,
Johan Rockström, the director of the Potsdam Institute for Climate
Impact Research, told the Guardian that while there was little to no
room for offsetting, he did not think that the SBTi decision was so
dramatic.
“I do appreciate the SBTi challenge
of how to incentivise companies to take responsibility for scope 3
emissions. In a transition phase, I can see that allowing for offsetting
may be the only options as long as scope 1 and 2 emissions follow the
carbon law of fossil-fuel phaseout and if the offsets are truly robust –
preferably focused on ‘like for like’,” he said.
“SBTi
companies are generally engaged in trying to be carbon neutral as fast
as possible, and they are leading their sectors when they quantify scope
3 emissions, so giving some opening for how to deal with this in the
short run – say, the next five years – is acceptable,” he added.
Find more age of extinction coverage here, and follow biodiversity reporters Phoebe Weston and Patrick Greenfield on X for all the latest news and features
(Article by Patrick Greenfield and Fiona Harvey republished from theguardian.com)
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: Planet Today
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://www.planet-today.com and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.