SUSTAINABILITY | STRATEGIES
There are a lot of companies worried about disclosing scope 1 , 2 and 3 in terms of their carbon footprint , but you have to get everybody disclosing and regulating for the data to get better
William Theisen CEO of EcoAct North America
“ Is converting spend-based emission factors into tonnes going to be completely accurate ? Is it going to give you the hotspots of where action should be taken ? Not necessarily , because you just spend less and your emissions go down , so it ’ s not the best strategy .”
Teamwork crucial to scope 3 reporting Plenty of grey areas exist in the area of climate-related disclosure – not just in the US , but across North America and beyond .
GHG Protocol , which supplies the world ' s most widely used greenhouse gas accounting standards , is in the process of updating how it assesses emission calculations .
“ I think companies are open to calculating their emissions ,” Theisen continues , “ but it goes back to the issue of companies working in the same sector using different methods .
There could easily be a misunderstanding or lack of clarity on why one company ’ s scope 3 emissions are so much higher than another .
“ So , it really takes more context and I think that ’ s why GHG Protocol – with the public consultation that ’ s going on right now – is looking at how to better standardise things , so you can compare apples with apples .”
In a bid to achieve greater accuracy , Theisen believes the key going forward is for organisations to join forces and work together .
“ In the US , it ’ s largely been voluntary investors pushing companies to start disclosing their carbon footprint , climate risk and emission reduction targets , but the data won ' t really be there until everybody ' s on board ,” he says .
“ I ’ d imagine there are a lot of companies that are worried about disclosing scope 1 , 2 and 3 in terms of their carbon footprint
68 September 2023