Looking ahead, sustainability efforts will likely expand through regulatory frameworks, technological innovations, and collective adaptation to climate impacts. Although this marks the end of the podcast, listeners can continue engaging with sustainability discussions on: 

– ESG Talk 

– Off the Books

November 18–22, 2024

This week:

We dive into the highlights, controversies, and challenges of COP29 in Azerbaijan. While ambitious climate commitments were announced, such as the UN's 81% emissions reduction target by 2035 and Indonesia’s plans for net zero by 2060, skepticism remains about how these goals will be achieved. The conference also saw significant milestones, including the establishment of global carbon market standards under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, which could dramatically reduce the cost of implementing NDCs. However, criticism marred the summit, with allegations of fossil fuel deals overshadowing its mission. As global negotiations continue, the podcast underscores the necessity of these forums despite their imperfections, emphasizing their pivotal role in advancing climate action.

November 11–15, 2024

This week:

After the 2024 U.S. election, several states took significant climate action despite federal uncertainties. Washington voters upheld the Climate Commitment Act, ensuring funding for carbon reduction projects, while California approved a $10 billion resilience fund targeting wildfire prevention, water conservation, and clean energy. Hawaii launched a Climate Resiliency Fund, and Louisiana allocated renewable energy revenue for coastal restoration. In South Dakota, voters repealed a law favoring pipeline development, prioritizing landowner rights. Meanwhile, Texas reinforced fossil fuel policies, leaving climate action to local efforts. These state-level initiatives reflect growing public support for policies that enhance safety and resilience.

Covers the potential impacts of the 2024 U.S. presidential election on climate policy, with anticipated rollbacks under a second Trump administration, including possible withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and increased fossil fuel production. However, strong state-level policies, investor demands, and market dynamics are likely to sustain sustainability progress.

In addition, we recap Workiva’s recent Amplify Conference in EMEA, where industry leaders discussed the complexity of financial and ESG reporting under regulations like the EU's CSRD. Keynotes emphasized the importance of cross-functional collaboration, digital transformation, and assured integrated reporting to meet stakeholder expectations in an evolving regulatory landscape.

Dives into two major reports spotlighting the urgency of climate action as COP29 approaches. Despite national pledges, current trajectories fall significantly short of the 43% emissions reduction scientists say is needed by 2030—an alarming gap with drastic implications.

Additionally, COP29, known as the “finance COP,” will see countries renegotiate climate finance goals, aiming to replace the original $100 billion annual target with a more ambitious funding framework. With new commitments on the table, major emitters and financial contributors face increasing pressure to bring stronger, actionable pledges to the summit.

Covers two major climate-related developments in California. The University of California, San Diego has introduced a mandatory climate-focused course for all students, signaling the growing importance of climate education across all fields of study. The episode also explores California’s leadership in climate policy, particularly as it faces political challenges, including potential rollbacks of environmental regulations and court battles over stricter emissions standards. Both stories emphasize California's ongoing efforts to integrate climate resilience into education and policy.

October 14–18, 2024

This week:

We focused on the Climate Commitment Act in Washington State and the push to repeal it during this upcoming election. Launched in 2023 this legislation targets major business emitters, aiming to significantly reduce emissions and align with IPCC and SBTI targets. It has already generated $2 billion for various mitigation projects, including retrofitting buildings and electrifying transportation. Despite its successes, critics, notably the political action committee Let's Go Washington, attribute rising gas prices to the Act, though evidence contradicts this claim. Repealing the Act would not only undermine climate action but also prioritize business interests over community needs, potentially increasing the long-term costs of climate change.

October 7–11, 2024

This week:

This episode explores the increasing frequency and intensity of hurricanes, focusing on recent storms Helene and Milton– examining how climate change is fueling stronger storms through warmer ocean temperatures and rising sea levels, leading to widespread damage and displacement. There is an urgent need for improved disaster preparedness, stronger climate policies, and a balanced approach to both climate adaptation and mitigation to protect vulnerable regions and reduce future risks.

September 30 – October 4, 2024

This week:

Our team covers three important climate updates. We begin with the introduction of the Task Force on Inequality and Socially Related Financial Disclosures (TISFD), aimed at helping companies disclose socially related financial risks. Next, we examine California’s Senate Bill 219, which consolidates climate legislation and revises scope 3 emissions reporting timelines. Lastly, we recap New York City’s Climate Week, where discussions focused on accelerating the green economy, the evolving role of voluntary carbon markets, and the increasing alignment between sustainability and profitability.

#theweekinsustainability #sustainability #carbon #climateweek #climateregulations #climateframworks #GHP #globalwarming CA219 #TISFD

September 16–20, 2024

This week:

In the fourth and final episode of the ESG Talk Climate Week series, Nancy Mahon, chief sustainability officer of the Estée Lauder Companies, joins host Alyssa Zucker to discuss the company’s approach to Scope 3 measurement and reporting. They cover the impact of consumer sustainability preferences and the unique challenges of leading sustainability efforts across a diverse portfolio of brands.

– Recent extreme weather events in North America underscore the growing need for cities to adopt robust climate resilience strategies, including infrastructure upgrades and comprehensive climate risk assessments.

–Attribution science is increasingly vital in understanding how climate change amplifies the severity of weather events, guiding policymakers to implement more effective mitigation and adaptation measures.

– Shift in power dynamics: The Supreme Court's decision to overturn the Chevron Doctrine significantly alters the balance of power between federal agencies and the judiciary, granting courts more authority to interpret laws and potentially limiting the ability of agencies like the EPA and SEC to enact and enforce climate-related regulations without explicit congressional authorization.

– Impact on climate policy: This ruling presents challenges for federal agencies, as it may lead to regulatory rollbacks and increased legal battles over climate policies. The decision could slow progress on environmental regulations and require Congress to pass more explicit legislation to empower agencies to address complex issues like climate change.

– Harris’s potential impact: Vice President Kamala Harris, with a strong history in climate action and environmental justice, is poised to build on Biden’s climate legacy if she becomes the Democratic nominee. Her challenge will be distinguishing herself from Biden, particularly on controversial issues like the Willow project, while accelerating the transition to clean energy.

– Challenges and gaps: Only 15% of companies have set targets for upstream Scope 3 emissions due to complexities in data collection, lack of supply chain transparency, and prioritization of direct emissions.

– Key actions for improvement: The report suggests three critical factors for addressing Scope 3 emissions: having a climate-responsible board, engaging suppliers for transparency and emission reductions, and adopting internal carbon pricing to incentivize low-carbon practices.

–Kern County wildfires: Recent wildfires in Kern County caused major evacuations and extensive damage, highlighting the urgent need for climate action as extreme heat and dry conditions fuel more frequent and severe fires.

–Climate regulation landscape: The SEC’s new climate-risk disclosure rule aims to standardize ESG reporting despite legal challenges. Companies must proactively address regulations and prepare for complex reporting, including Scope 3 emissions.

–Impact of Hurricane Beryl: Hurricane Beryl, which hit Texas as a Category 1 storm after devastating Jamaica and Mexico, set records for rapid intensification and highlighted climate risks– underscoring the need for businesses to invest in resilience and prepare for disruptions from extreme weather events.

This legal principle, which requires courts to defer to agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes, has sparked debates over regulatory stability and clarity, particularly in light of challenges like Ohio v EPA. The decision underscores ongoing tensions between judicial oversight and agency expertise in shaping future environmental regulations.

–The acquisition paves the way for the launch of Workiva Carbon, a groundbreaking platform designed to streamline the measurement, management, and reporting of carbon emissions. Sustain.Life, which is now part of Workiva Carbon, is poised to revolutionize how companies approach sustainability reporting and carbon management.

https://www.workiva.com/solutions/carbon-management

Rise of solar power in the U.S.: Solar energy is rapidly expanding, with installations increasing fivefold since 2016. The U.S. aims to boost solar capacity to meet 100% clean electricity by 2035, despite challenges like improving storage technology, streamlining permitting processes, and overcoming fossil fuel industry opposition.

The 2024 CDP questionnaire has arrived, and reporting season is underway. This year's updates include integrating climate, water, and forest disclosures into a single document, simplifying data submission, and enhancing report quality. It features dedicated sections for SMEs and aligns with global standards like TNFD and CSRD, ensuring compliance and investor confidence. New topics cover biodiversity and plastics, and the Activity Classification System tailors questions to specific business models. For a successful submission, organizations should start early, collect high-quality data, engage internally, and align responses with sustainability goals.

We sat down with AArete, who supports higher education institutions in leveraging data to enhance sustainability and profitability. Universities face unique challenges due to their non-profit status, focusing on long-term impact rather than short-term financial returns.  Effective procurement strategies involve choosing suppliers committed to achieving net-zero emissions and implementing automated data collection, which is essential for simplifying reporting and implementing actionable climate strategies.  

– The interoperability guidance released by ESRS and ISSB standards, aiming to streamline reporting efforts across different sustainability reporting frameworks.

– The release of the new CDP's 2024 reporting questionnaire, highlighting its alignment with various reporting standards and frameworks such as TCFD, TNFD, SEC's climate disclosure rule, and EU's ESRS, along with the support provided by Sustained Life as an accredited solution provider.

April 8–12, 2024

This week:

Our team dived into three crucial sustainability topics:

–The influence of financed emissions on businesses

–The importance of external assurance in emissions reporting

–The grid challenges brought on by a recent solar eclipse

This eclipse resulted in a significant drop in solar energy generation, forcing grid operators to increase their reliance on fossil fuels to maintain energy balance.

The Oatey’s experience serves as a valuable roadmap, not just for the plumbing industry, but for any organization looking to navigate scope 3 complexities and create a more sustainable supply chain.

In this episode of The Week in Sustainability, we welcome Christopher McClure a partner and ESG services leader for Crowe LLP, a leading public accounting, consulting, and technology firm.

– CDP's 2023 reporting cycle showcases global leaders in environmental transparency, with only 2% of respondents achieving the coveted 'A-list' status, underscoring the growing importance of comprehensive sustainability disclosure.

– China's new sustainability guidelines mandate reporting across governance, strategy, and emissions for listed companies, signaling a significant step towards integrating environmental considerations into corporate decision-making and fostering economic resilience.

These laws primarily target large corporations operating in California and those making net zero and carbon-neutral claims. One of the key laws, SB 253, the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act, mandates emissions disclosure, including greenhouse gases across Scopes 1, 2, and 3. Companies doing business in California with annual revenues exceeding one billion dollars fall under its purview. The phased timeline for reporting begins in 2026, with third-party assurance requirements starting in 2030. Notably, penalties for Scope 3 misstatements are deferred until 2030 due to the inherent challenges in measuring these emissions accurately.

Another significant law, SB 261, the Climate-Related Financial Risk Act, requires companies with annual revenues exceeding 500 million to prepare annual climate-related financial risk disclosures aligned with the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosure (TCFD). Penalties for violations under this law can reach up to $50,000.

AB 1305, the Voluntary Carbon Market Disclosures Act, focuses on companies making net zero or carbon neutrality claims and those involved in voluntary carbon markets. It mandates public disclosure of carbon offset projects, including verification measures and calculation methods, aiming to bring accountability and transparency to these markets. Non-compliance with this law can result in civil penalties of up to $500,000.

While California leads the way, similar legislative efforts are emerging in other states like Washington and New York, with proposed corporate climate accountability acts mirroring California's laws. These laws often prescribe compliance with the Greenhouse Gas Protocols Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard and the Scope 3 Corporate Value Chain Standard. As these standards undergo review and modernization, selecting a carbon management partner aligned with these standards becomes essential for mandated disclosure compliance.

Despite the importance of these laws in driving decarbonization and enhancing accountability, they are not without challenges. Legal opposition, such as lawsuits filed by business groups, may impede their implementation. However, many corporate actors recognize the inevitability of disclosure mandates and are proactively preparing for compliance, evidenced by the surge of corporate inventories and readiness checks for third-party assurance requirements.

While challenges and legal battles may arise, the momentum toward climate disclosure mandates remains strong. These laws represent a critical step towards fostering environmental responsibility, providing valuable information to financial and capital markets, and ultimately advancing global sustainability efforts.

CSRD unveiled: a significant expansion

For those unacquainted with CSRD, it signifies a substantial expansion of the NFRD, incorporating more companies and imposing extensive reporting requirements. The EU aims to guide investments towards sustainable initiatives, aligning with the EU Green New Deal principles. Initially adopted in November 2022, non-EU companies and those subject to sector-specific reporting now have an extended reporting deadline, moving from 2024 to 2026 for large public and private entities.

Navigating complexity: reporting challenges unveiled

Reflecting on these changes, sustainability experts emphasize the intricate nature of reporting due to the absence of standardized guidelines across sectors. The complexity extends to calculations, data representation, and the challenge of delivering high-quality reporting. The delay, particularly for sector-specific standards, underscores the prevailing uncertainties both public and private entities face. Organizations outside the EU and in specific sectors receive extra time to collect essential data and set up transparent reporting systems.

EU’s commitment to quality implementation

Experts underscore the EU’s unwavering commitment to achieving high-quality implementation of CSRD, ensuring that organizations meet the directive’s stringent standards. The delay, far from a setback, signifies the EU's dedication to discouraging subpar reporting and promoting transparency.

Strategic action in the face of postponement

During this postponement, organizations should strategically use the time– this involves planning sustainability initiatives, comprehending their impact, and building internal capacity, including training and essential systems. Procrastination is not an option; companies should focus on fostering transparency and engaging internal and external stakeholders.

Turning hurdles into opportunities: strengthening sustainability initiatives

While companies might perceive the delay as a hurdle, it allows them to strengthen their sustainability initiatives. Experts advocate for meaningful action, integrating sustainability goals into core business strategies, and continuously improving practices.

Global reflections on sustainability reporting

In a broader context, the CSRD delay prompts reflection on the ongoing discussions surrounding the SEC climate disclosure rule in the United States. Experts acknowledge the evolving nature of carbon accounting and ESG initiatives, urging organizations not to let uncertainties hinder their sustainability efforts.

Adapting to a dynamic landscape

Companies should take this time to reevaluate their sustainability strategies during this delay. Transparency remains paramount, and organizations are encouraged to leverage this time to strategically plan, engage stakeholders, and integrate sustainable practices into their core business strategies. Organizations must adapt and thrive in this dynamic environment as the corporate sustainability landscape continues to evolve.

‍ESG and resilience in focus:

• The conference showcased a solid commitment to ESG principles, emphasizing building resilient supply chains. This shift reflects a growing awareness of the need for sustainable practices in retail.
• Retail leaders now prioritize sustainability, a notable change given the industry’s traditional focus on profit and growth.

Technological innovations in supply chain management:

• A key highlight was using AI and predictive modeling to minimize supply chain disruptions. This approach is not only innovative but also a critical step in ensuring smooth retail operations amidst increasing environmental uncertainties.
• Technology integration in supply chains paves the way for more efficient and reliable operations, crucial for the retail sector's success.

Walmart’s pioneering approach to sustainable supply chains:

• Walmart’s session, led by their EVP of Supply Chain Operations and SVP of Sustainability, stood out. They discussed creating value through sustainable supply chains, linking resilience, efficiency, product availability, risk mitigation, and worker opportunities.
• This session highlighted the practical benefits of sustainable practices regarding environmental impact and business efficiency.

Tech-driven solutions for supply chain weather-related disruptions

• Innovations by major players like IBM and smaller companies in AI-driven predictive modeling for weather-related supply chain disruptions were impressive.
• These technologies embody the idea of physical risk mitigation, which is crucial for maintaining steady and reliable supply chains in the face of increasing natural disasters and climate change impacts.

TCFD and its practical implications:

• The conference illustrated the practical application of TCFD (Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures) principles in retail. The focus was on building resilience and strategic value creation through climate risk assessment and management.
• TCFD's framework was implicitly present in the tools and technologies showcased, highlighting the industry’s move towards comprehensive climate risk management.

Sustainability as a cross-functional priority:

• The conference wasn't solely aimed at sustainability experts but attracted a diverse group of retail professionals. This diversity underscores the universal importance of sustainability across all retail sectors.
• Discussions on AI, technology, and supplier engagement in decarbonization indicate a holistic approach to sustainability, integrating it into every aspect of retail operations.

The NRF Big Show Conference 2024 marked a pivotal moment for the retail industry, with a clear shift towards sustainability and technological innovation. The conference highlighted the latest trends and solutions and underscored the industry's commitment to a more sustainable future. The insights gained from this event are vital for anyone involved in retail, showcasing how sustainability and technology are becoming integral to the sector's success and resilience. The energy and engagement at the conference promise an even more impactful event next year, driving the industry toward a more sustainable and technologically advanced future.

Key to Australia’s evolving environmental strategy is its commitment to reducing emissions and transitioning away from coal dependency, as highlighted in the recent COP28. This shift is particularly significant for a traditionally coal-reliant nation, signaling a major transformation in its approach to sustainable energy.

Australia's proactive involvement in the Loss and Damage fund on the international stage demonstrates its commitment to global climate initiatives. Recent extreme weather events in South Australia, including bushfires and flooding, underscore the urgency of this commitment, bringing the realities of climate change into sharp focus.

In the corporate arena, Australian businesses are rapidly adapting to the changing energy landscape. A noticeable trend towards renewable energy reflects a broader transformation within the corporate sector. The move from voluntary to mandatory climate reporting brings new challenges and opportunities, emphasizing the need for robust governance, accurate data management, and high-quality data assurance.

The narrative around climate change in Australia is evolving from viewing it as a challenge to recognizing it as an opportunity for innovation and value creation. This positive shift drives forward-thinking strategies and solutions, underscoring Australia’s role as a dynamic player in the global effort towards a more sustainable future.

• Global supply chains under the microscope–The focus on transparency and public reporting within global supply chains has become more pronounced. This year, we’re seeing a significant shift towards improving data accessibility, with large corporations and smaller suppliers under increased scrutiny. The emphasis is on creating a transparent supply network where every participant is accountable for their sustainability practices.
• The rise of technological integration–Integrating digital tools is set to revolutionize sustainability practices in supply chains and beyond. Developers and industry leaders expect these technologies to streamline processes, enhance transparency, and deliver comprehensive insights into supply chain operations.
• Regulatory changes driving action–Anticipated regulatory changes, especially from bodies like the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), push organizations to rethink and readjust their sustainability strategies. Companies are gearing up for new requirements, like calculating scope three emissions and preparing for third-party audits, signaling a shift towards more rigorous sustainability compliance.
• Harmonization in reporting standards–Industry leaders are actively aligning various sustainability reporting standards, like the SBTI and CSRD, to simplify compliance processes. This harmonization effort targets making it easier for organizations, especially those with limited resources, to meet sustainability reporting requirements. This trend is driving a more unified and coherent approach to sustainability reporting.
• Private equity’s growing influence–The influence of private equity in shaping sustainability practices is becoming increasingly apparent–initiatives like the ESG Data Convergence guide firms towards more standardized reporting and actionable sustainability measures. This trend reflects the growing role of private equity in promoting sustainable practices among portfolio companies.
• Sustainability conversations in the boardroom–Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) topics are now taking center stage in corporate boardroom discussions. There is a heightened focus on genuine decarbonization efforts, avoiding greenwashing, and ensuring that concrete actions back public sustainability claims. This shift underscores the growing importance of sustainability in corporate governance and strategic decision-making.

It will be interesting to look back a year from now and see how this year’s predictions pan out. Many of these trends highlight a dynamic and evolving landscape in the sustainability sector for 2024, marked by increased accountability, technological advancement, regulatory alignment, and strategic corporate focus on genuine sustainability practices.

Key developments:

1. International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) release: This year witnessed the highly anticipated release of the ISSB’s IFRS global reporting standards. These standards marked a pivotal moment in creating a unified framework for sustainability reporting, aiming to consolidate various reporting requirements under a cohesive global standard.
2. EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD): The formal adoption of the EU's CSRD represented a significant regulatory milestone. It emphasized the need for companies to disclose their environmental and social impacts, enhancing transparency and accountability in corporate governance.
3. Alignment and harmonization efforts: Despite delays in finalizing certain rules and details, the year saw efforts to align and harmonize the various ESG standards. This endeavor aimed to simplify the complex landscape of sustainability reporting, making it more accessible for stakeholders.
4. Private market initiatives: In response to regulatory developments, giant private market corporations announced ambitious climate plans focusing on supply chain decarbonization. This proactive stance demonstrated leadership and commitment to sustainability beyond regulatory requirements.
5. Focus on scope 3 emissions: The year cemented the consensus on the criticality of scope 3 emissions in climate accountability. There was a notable shift in efforts towards understanding and mitigating these indirect emissions, highlighting the need for comprehensive strategies in supply chain decarbonization.
6. Notable regulatory and reporting developments: The year also saw the official release of ISSB’s IFRS S1 Sustainability and S2 Climate disclosures, California’s Climate Package SB-253 and SB-261, and the formal adoption of ESRS reporting standards to facilitate the EU’s CSRD. 

This past year, regulatory frameworks, corporate initiatives, and a heightened focus on comprehensive climate accountability converged, creating a more unified and actionable approach to sustainability. With this shift, companies must adapt and prepare for an evolving landscape in 2024 and beyond, emphasizing strategic decision-making and long-term value creation in the face of climate challenges.

If you've followed news surrounding previous COPs, you’re no stranger to the rollercoaster ride they can become. The high- and low-lights:

Controversies and context

• Location and leadership: COP28 in Dubai, led by Sultan Al Jaber of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company, sparked controversy due to the UAE's status as a major oil producer and potential conflicts of interest.
• Record attendance and lobbyist presence: COP28 attracted over 100,000 attendees despite the controversies, indicating a growing interest in climate discussions. However, the unprecedented presence of fossil fuel lobbyistsraised concerns about the event's alignment with oil and gas interests.

Key highlights

1. Loss and damage fund: A significant win was the establishment of a fund to support the Global South, which is significantly affected by climate crises. However, the pledged amount needs to catch up to the estimated need.
2. Methane and refrigerant regulations: Progress emerged in tackling harmful greenhouse gases, with new rules in the U.S. and EU targeting methane emissions reduction. Meanwhile, 63 countries committed to the Cooling Pledge, aiming to cut coolant emissions.
3. Renewable energy and agriculture initiatives: Governments pledged to triple renewable energy capacity by 2030 and address the climate impact of agriculture, mainly focusing on meat and dairy emissions.
4. Voluntary carbon market standards: The International Organization of Securities Commissions proposed measures to enhance the integrity of Voluntary Carbon Markets, indicating a move toward more rigorous standards.
5. Global stocktake – fossil fuel phase-out: The final COP agreement included language about transitioning away from fossil fuels but fell short of the strong commitment activists sought.

Looking ahead

• The next two COPs (COP29 will be in Azerbaijan) are crucial to establish new climate finance goals and updating nationally determined contributions.
• Our perspective: The agreements reached are a step forward, but practical implementation remains vital. We approach these developments with cautious optimism, recognizing the need for action that matches the urgency of the climate challenge.

COP28 brought to light the complexities and challenges in global climate negotiations. We recognize the importance of these discussions and remain committed to leading the way in sustainable practices and solutions. The journey toward a more sustainable future continues, and we're here to guide and support businesses and individuals in making impactful choices for the planet.

Understanding retailer emissions

• Scope 1 emissions: During the holiday season, retailers often extend their store hours, increasing natural gas use for heating and other direct emissions from the stores.
• Scope 2 emissions: The festive lighting and extended operating hours result in a spike in electricity consumption, contributing to a retailer's Scope 2 emissions.
• Scope 3 emissions: This category sees the most significant increase during the holidays. With more goods and services purchased, the entire value chain of retailers is affected, leading to higher emissions.

How consumers can make a difference

As consumers, our choices have a powerful impact on retailer emissions. Here are some ways we can help reduce their environmental footprint:

1. Conscious purchasing: Opting for eco-friendly and sustainably packaged products can significantly reduce retailers' Scope 3 emissions.
2. Reducing transportation emissions: In e-commerce, choosing consolidated shipping options can lower transportation and distribution emissions.
3. Longevity in products: By selecting products with a longer lifespan, we can decrease the frequency of purchases, thus impacting the use and emissions of sold products.

Embracing sustainability in our festive shopping

The holiday season is a period of increased consumption and an opportunity to be mindful of our environmental impact. By making informed and sustainable choices, we, as consumers, can play a crucial role in shaping the sustainability practices of retailers. This period gives us a unique chance to influence the Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions of retailers and, by extension, contribute positively to the environment.

As we enter the holiday season, remember that our purchasing power extends beyond the products we buy; it's a tool for environmental advocacy.

As we gear up for COP28, Australia has made notable climate strides that can't go unnoticed. Under Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, the country has set ambitious goals to reduce emissions by 43% by 2030, a significant leap from the previous 28% target. At COP28, Energy Minister Chris Bowen will present a report indicating that Australia is on track for a 37% reduction with existing programs while aiming for 42%. Here are just a few bold steps Australia has taken on climate action:

1. Safeguard mechanism in heavy industry: A groundbreaking policy compels industrial facilities emitting over 100,000 metric tons of CO2e annually to cut emissions. This policy includes mining and oil and gas production facilities, marking a significant step towards reducing emissions.
2. Electric vehicle (EV) strategy: Despite the absence of a new fuel efficiency standard, Australia's EV strategy is promising, focusing on infrastructure and charging access. The federal push is encouraging more EV brands to enter the market, signifying a shift in the supply-demand balance.
3. Rapid adoption of rooftop solar: Australia is the fastest-growing rooftop solar market globally, reflecting the community's strong desire for an energy transition. Policies at federal, state, and council levels support renewable home energy, though affordability remains a challenge.

Community's role in climate action

The climate policy in Australia is not just top-down; community involvement is pivotal. This week, climate activists organized a protest in Newcastle, arresting 109 people for blocking coal shipping and emphasizing the public's demand for swifter climate action. The protest, including diverse participants like retired coal miners and high school students, underscores a collective push for a just and swift transition away from fossil fuels.

Australia's climate action, backed by government policies and community activism, is a beacon of hope. As we witness these developments, it's clear that a sustainable future is not just a vision but can be an achievable reality. 

This week, the National Climate Assessment was released, a pivotal report crafted every five years by major U.S. Federal agencies. This 2023 edition did not shy away from the stark climate risks looming over us. Yet, it's not all doom and gloom. The report underscores significant strides in climate action across the U.S. since 2018, with unexpected frontrunners like Virginia, Texas, and Florida making remarkable progress.

Even though these states are not known to implement climate mitigation efforts, these actions aren't just about environmental protection but have the potential to increase economic opportunities. Initiatives like grid expansion and energy efficiency are pivotal for a sustainable future and job creation engines in states like Nevada, Vermont, and Alaska.

A compelling takeaway from the report is the potential of a 100% renewable pathway. By 2050, this could result in a net creation of 6 million jobs, offsetting the decline in fossil fuel industry employment. It's a resounding affirmation that the clean energy economy isn't just beneficial for the environment but also for the job market.

International climate action: China and the U.S. unite

Switching to more of an international stage, the U.S. and China declared their commitment toward more renewable energy. China's pledge to set reduction targets for all greenhouse gases, not just CO2, is particularly notable.

While much of this remains symbolic, the symbolism carries weight. As the U.N.'s COP28 approaches, this collaboration between the world's largest current and historical climate polluters sends a powerful message of readiness to cooperate, potentially smoothing the path for future global climate negotiations.

This agreement between China and the U.S. didn't materialize overnight. Months of negotiations have laid a foundation of trust and relationship-building, essential for future collaborative efforts. Thus, we view this as a step in the right direction, a glimmer of hope in the ongoing battle against climate change.

The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), with its substantial $369 billion funding package, stands at the forefront of America's push toward a greener future. Yet, its recent entanglement with Texas's highway infrastructure plans has raised eyebrows. The proposal to allocate $112 million of IRA funds to expand highways aims at reducing congestion and idling. 

However, this move has sparked debate due to its seemingly counterintuitive alignment with the bill's decarbonization goals. Critics argue that such an approach only scratches the surface of potential environmental benefits and bypasses more impactful opportunities to reduce fossil fuel dependence. Texas's transport sector, a significant emitter, could benefit more from investments in electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure, alternative fuels, and optimized freight logistics.

The GOP’s climate conundrum

The landscape of climate politics and policy reveals a complex interplay of economic interests, environmental imperatives, and ideological commitments. 

The Republican presidential candidates’ stances on climate change illuminate the intricate dance between acknowledging environmental issues and towing the party line. There is a consensus on the reality of climate change but a division on human responsibility. The GOP historically promotes energy independence and domestic production while pointing fingers at global emitters, overlooking the U.S.'s substantial historical emissions. Candidates predominantly support the expansion of domestic fossil fuels, with a notable divide over coal usage. Chris Christie singularly champions a comprehensive shift toward renewables, yet paradoxically stands alongside his peers in opposing the 2015 Paris Accord.

Furthermore, despite the advantages of the IRA for Republican districts, not one Republican candidate supports the Act's clean energy incentives. This contradiction underscores the intense politicization of climate issues. It also raises concerns about the economic wisdom of opposing measures that could foster the desired energy independence and economic growth.

The pressing question remains: Can political leaders transcend partisanship to forge a path toward a sustainable and economically robust future?

‍Navigating the deep sea dilemma

‍Due to the depths of our oceans, there is a delicate balance between extracting necessary minerals from the seabed and protecting an environment largely shrouded in mystery. While we've mapped 100% of the ocean floor, it still eludes our current climate knowledge and the impact of deep-sea mining. 

The UK recently joined 20 countries, including Germany, Brazil, and Canada, in calling for a moratorium on commercial deep-sea mining. Car manufacturers like BMW and Volvo have also voiced their opposition, pledging not to accept minerals like nickel and cobalt sourced from the deep sea.

However, the difficulty lies in the pivotal role these minerals play in our transition to renewable energy. With on-land mining supply lagging behind growing demand, the question becomes: How can we accelerate climate action without jeopardizing the marine ecosystem?

‍Addressing land-based issues: Methane from landfills

Shifting focus back to land, a letter penned by 56 city officials from 18 U.S. states to the EPA underscored the significant contribution landfills have on the nation's emissions, which are responsible for about 14% of U.S. methane emissions. Of note: The letter pointed out that methane is 28 times more potent than carbon dioxide.

The call to action has two main asks:

• A plan to phase out organic material in landfills by 2040.
• An update to landfill standards to incorporate advanced technologies for detecting and mitigating methane leaks.

While many local governments have made strides in reducing food waste through composting programs, the leaders urge the EPA to expand grant funding, making these initiatives more widespread and accessible to the public, thereby addressing a substantial contributor to climate change.

‍Striking the balance

‍From the ocean's depths to our backyards, pursuing sustainable solutions requires a delicate equilibrium. As nations and industries grapple with the urgency of climate action, the tug-of-war between traditional environmentalism and rapid renewable expansion becomes apparent.

In addressing these concerns, the UK's stance against deep sea mining emphasizes caution, while U.S. officials' appeal to the EPA underscores the necessity of immediate waste management action. 

October 23–27

This week:

– DOE’s new funding: The Department of Energy has committed a whopping $3.5B towards upgrading the electric grid. Stemming from the bipartisan infrastructure law of 2021, this move aims at enhancing the grid’s resiliency and capacity.

– GM’s unionization: GM (General Motors) is taking the lead amidst an ongoing auto worker strike by permitting its EV battery plant workers to unionize under the United Autoworkers Union.

About The Week in Sustainability

Each week, Sustain.Life’s sustainability team offers commentary about the week’s most pressing issues and stories in sustainability and ESG.

About Sustain.Life

Sustain.Life helps future-proof businesses by fighting climate change. ​

Learn more: www.sustain.life

#theweekinsustainability #sustainability #TDF #climatechange #climataction #generalmotors #electricvehicles #electrification #electricity #renewables #renewableenergy

About Sustain.Life Sustain.Life helps future-proof businesses by fighting climate change. ​

Learn more: www.sustain.life

The new climate legislation in the Golden State is, and has been, making big headlines. Governor Gavin Newsom has put his signature on SB 253 and SB 261. Starting in 2026, California will expect businesses generating more than $1 billion in revenue to publicly disclose their scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions. Furthermore, companies with revenue surpassing $500 million must highlight their climate-related financial risks, according to SB 261. While the SEC’s similar initiative focuses mainly on public companies, California’s legislation casts a considerably wider net.

Ember’s deep dive into 2023’s power trends

Independent energy think tank Ember’s recent analysis revealed some telling data on the global power sector. Its goal? Ascertain whether we’re on the right track to attain net-zero emissions by 2035. Results are mixed, which suggests we’re on the cusp of a monumental shift.

1. Renewable energy’s meteoric rise: Between January and June 2023, wind and solar generation globally increased by 12%. In comparison, fossil fuel generation barely budged, growing only by 0.1%. Notably, 50 countries set new records in solar energy production.
2. Hydropower’s unexpected dip: Despite being the oldest renewable source, hydropower faced challenges in 2023. As China grappled with heatwaves and droughts, its hydropower generation—the largest globally—decreased by 8.5%. Consequently, coal burning became a necessary evil to bridge the gap—a glaring reminder of the climate’s capriciousness and potential impact on the pace of energy transition.
3. Power sector emissions show new patterns: Since 2000, only twice have we seen a reduction in power sector emissions. After the 2009 financial crisis and during the 2019-2020 coronavirus pandemic. Though we witnessed only a minor increase this year, experts believe we would’ve seen a decrease without the unexpected hydropower shortfall.

Time to power up the renewables revolution

2023 has shown us the tangible impact of renewables in our energy mix. The shift is undeniable, but the rate of the shift must get more aggressive and keep pace. As the power landscape changes, so must our strategies. It’s high time we champion renewables more than ever and aim for a zero-emission power sector. 

When streets turned into streams

The city’s streets transformed into treacherous rivers, submerging vehicles mid-road and flooding basement apartments. The sight was eerily reminiscent of the devastating aftermath of Hurricane Ida in 2021. Such events are no longer anomalies—they’re the “new abnormal” as climate change rages on.

An ill-prepared infrastructure

So, why does New York City drown when the heavens open up? The root cause lies in NYC’s sewer system. Designed to process about 1.75 inches of rainfall per hour, it was overwhelmed by the rain, which came down at a rate of two inches per hour.

Furthermore, impermeable surfaces—pavement and rooftops—intensify the issue. These surfaces don’t allow rainwater to seep into the ground, increasing the runoff that sewer systems have to handle. This issue extends beyond dense urban centers and includes the runoff from highways and parking lots, which challenges sewer systems, often causing severe erosion. Recognizing this, NYC now mandates water catchment systems in new constructions and promotes the incorporation of green roofs.

The domino effect on sewer systems

When the sewer system is inundated, problems multiply. Normally, all sewer pipes channel water to wastewater treatment plants where rainwater and sewage undergo treatment before being released into local waterways. However, when overwhelmed, these plants dump untreated sewage and rainwater directly into waterways, known as combined sewer overflow. This is precisely why warnings against swimming in city rivers post-rainstorms exist.

Worse yet, excessive pressure can cause backflow, where sewage water reverses course into buildings. Not only is this nauseating, but it’s also a severe health hazard.

Silent city officials: Cause for concern

One can’t help but notice the lack of proactivity from New York City officials. Despite the evident chaos, the city’s response was noticeably muted. Residents were left uninformed, and it took a staggering 12 hours before the mayor finally addressed the issue.

Perhaps the most telling sign of the times is this: In past major flood events, a hurricane or tropical storm was often the culprit. But this time, the disaster was caused by a storm without a name, emphasizing the increasing unpredictability of our climate.

As thought leaders in the carbon accounting realm, we can’t stress enough the urgency of climate action. The waters of NYC are sending us a clear message: it’s time to pay attention, adapt, and take action.

‍

One of the central themes of Climate Week NYC 2023 was the widespread commitment to net-zero emissions goals. It demonstrates a growing acknowledgement among businesses: Addressing climate change is a moral imperative and essential for long-term economic resilience. While the tone remained hopeful, it was also realistic—we only have six years left to reduce global emissions by 50% to meet 2030 goals.    

2. Investments in renewable energy  

Renewable energy took center stage as companies unveiled significant investments in clean energy projects, including massive solar and wind farms. These T&D projects increase the capacity of the grid to move renewable power from the point of generation to the point of consumption, as well as investments in advanced energy storage technologies.  

3. Sustainable supply chains 

Supply chain sustainability emerged as a critical focus for businesses. Companies announced plans to reduce the carbon footprint of their supply chains by sourcing materials responsibly, optimizing logistics, and adopting circular economy principles. The shift reflects a growing demand from consumers for sustainable products and services and the regulatory landscape. 

4. Climate finance and green bonds 

Financial institutions and businesses showcased their commitment to climate finance. Green bonds, designed to fund environmentally beneficial projects, gained significant attention. It’s a trend that indicates a shift towards sustainable investments, with more capital flowing into projects that combat climate change and support sustainability initiatives. 

5. Carbon pricing and emissions reduction 

Many businesses pledged to adopt carbon pricing mechanisms within their operations. They also committed to substantial emissions reduction targets, aligning with the Paris Agreement’s goals. By putting a price on carbon and actively reducing emissions, these companies are positioning themselves as leaders in transitioning to a low-carbon economy. 

6. Technological innovation 

Innovations in clean technology were a hot topic at Climate Week. Companies showcased cutting-edge solutions, including carbon capture and utilization, sustainable agriculture techniques, and electric vehicle advancements. These innovations demonstrate that technology is an enabler of sustainability and can drive significant emissions reductions. 

7. Climate adaptation and resilience 

Climate adaptation and resilience to extreme weather events and rising sea levels were acknowledged as part of the inevitable impacts of climate change. Many announced initiatives to enhance their resilience and support vulnerable communities. 

8. Sustainable reporting and transparency 

Greater transparency and sustainability reporting were highlighted as essential for accountability. Businesses are committed to disclosing their environmental, social, and governance (ESG) metrics more comprehensively and providing investors and stakeholders with better insights into their sustainability efforts.  

Sustain.Life was proud to partner with UN Global Compact USA Network where the message rang clear on the power of data to enable sustainability reporting across the increasingly harmonized global reporting landscape. With recent announcements around CDP’s alignment with the ISSB, CSRD, and proposed SEC climate disclosure rules.  

‍

In yet another bold move to address climate change, California Governor Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta announced a lawsuit against five leading oil companies: BP, ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, and ConocoPhillips, along with their associated trade group, the American Petroleum Institute. 

The core of the lawsuit alleges that these energy giants were not only significantly responsible for exacerbating climate change but were fully aware of the potential risks for many decades. Rather than acting responsibly, these companies purportedly chose to conceal the damage, mislead consumers, and oppose renewable energy, all in the pursuit of increased profits. This lawsuit echoes similar legal actions taken by other jurisdictions like Rhode Island, Baltimore, and Honolulu. However, this legal challenge carries added weight given California’s vast economy. Evidence from the 1950s to the 1980s shows that these oil companies had multiple indications about the harmful effects of their products. Their denial and misinformation campaigns allegedly intensified following key global climate events in the early 1990s. 

California has expressed hopes that a jury trial might favor public health. If the companies decide to settle, California aims to establish an abatement fund to address the environmental damage the state has endured due to the changing climate.

New York’s Climate Week and worldwide protests 

Shifting focus to the East Coast, New York City recently initiated its 15th annual Climate Week. The event, however, wasn’t just limited to discussions and conferences. A massive wave of protesters, numbering between 50,000 and 75,000, took to the streets, demanding an end to the reliance on fossil fuels. Their message was potent and straightforward: discussions are valuable, but tangible action is overdue. 

This recent mobilization in New York is noteworthy, being the largest climate demonstration in the U.S. since the onset of the coronavirus pandemic. The momentum isn’t just national—global protests are anticipated across 54 countries, with an expected staggering 1 million individuals. 

This surge of activism coincides strategically with key global events, namely the UN General Assembly and the UN Climate Ambition Summit. The urgency behind these protests is palpable, especially given recent data indicating 2022 is the hottest year on record and the pressing concern of transgressing six of the nine planetary boundaries. Yet, amid the critical challenges, there’s a silver lining: The ozone layer’s recovery, thanks to informed policies and global cooperation, stands as a beacon of hope. Its repair underscores that concerted, coordinated efforts can usher in positive change.

Paving the way: California’s climate bills

California is once again at the forefront of climate legislation. The state has passed two promising bills: SB 253, aka the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act, and SB 261, the Climate-related Risk Disclosure Act. Both bills remain unsigned, but their momentum is undeniable. What sets them apart?

• SB 253 will require companies boasting revenues over $1B (regardless of being public or private) to verify and disclose their emissions across all scopes.
• SB 261 demands businesses with a revenue threshold above $500M to report climate-associated risks in harmony with the TCFD.

Interestingly, these bills not only align with proposed SEC rules, but notably encompass private entities, hinting at broader, rippling effects through supply chains.

Apple’s ongoing green evolution

Lovable tech titan, Apple, publicly endorsed the California bills, likely due to its preparedness signaled by their latest product launches, which focused heavily on sustainability.

Key highlights from the September 12 Apple event:

• Freight emissions cut: Apple is largely transitioning from air to ocean freight, which has a 95% smaller carbon footprint.
• Carbon neutral product debut: The launch of new Apple Watch models have been designed to be carbon neutral—a big step for the company in its quest to become net-zero by 2030 (more on that in a sec).
• A farewell to leather: Vegan enthusiasts rejoice! Apple is transitioning away from leather, which might redefine leather’s luxury status.
• Recycled minerals: Apple has taken a significant step by using 100% recycled cobalt in their batteries, addressing both environmental and ethical concerns in the supply chain.

While Apple’s initiatives are commendable, it’s essential to gauge their progress against their broader carbon reduction goals. The company aims for net-zero by 2030 and has already slashed emissions by 45% since 2015. Individual announcements might dazzle, but the journey to their ultimate goal remains paramount.

And there’s still the curious case of a move to titanium. Apple’s choice to introduce a titanium frame in their new iPhone Pro models has raised eyebrows. With a carbon footprint significantly larger than aluminum, it begs the question: Do we really need such high-end materials in everyday tech?

Background on Burning Man 

Originating from a small group of artists in San Francisco, Burning Man now attracts around 70,000 attendees annually in the Nevada desert. Attendees would argue it’s not just a festival—it’s a temporary city with guiding principles that resonate closely with sustainability, like radical inclusion, civic responsibility, and environmental protection.

Environmental concerns around Burning Man 

As the event’s popularity has surged, so have environmental criticisms. Noteworthy issues include:

• Carbon footprint – Recent reports suggest that the festival generates an eyebrow-raising 100,000 tons of CO2 annually, equivalent to burning 100 million pounds of coal. It’s a statistic at odds with the festival’s ambition to achieve carbon neutrality by 2030.
• Transportation – The festival’s predominant emissions culprit? Air travel, especially as the wealthy and elite increasingly frequent the event from far-off locations.
• On-site emissions – The evolution from rustic camping to diesel-powered installations and air-conditioned RVs significantly contributes to the festival’s carbon footprint.
• Weather: Emblematic of the climate crisis, this year’s event faced torrential rains, which left attendees stranded and forced to ration resources due to the desert’s impassability.

More context

• Physical climate risks – Burning Man underscores the real physical risks businesses and events face due to climate change, especially as weather patterns shift.
• Not In My Backyard (NIMBY) – An environmental justice principle, NIMBY, highlights the challenges faced when socially privileged groups resist sustainable projects in their vicinity. A case in point is Burning Man’s opposition to a geothermal exploration project in the Black Rock National Conservation Area, raising questions about potential hypocrisy given the event’s own environmental impact.

Despite its foundational ideals, Burning Man is grappling with environmental challenges that force questions of its alignment with sustainable practices.

Marvel in marine shipping

Traditionally derived from natural gas, methanol is emerging as a potential alternative to heavy fuel oil in marine cargo shipping. The advantages? Methanol emits 80% less nitrogen oxide and 99% less sulfur oxide. But, the carbon emissions from conventional methanol remain a concern. Enter biomass-based methanol, a greener variant that emits 60–90% less carbon than its conventional counterpart. 

While challenges loom in the form of higher costs and availability (unsurprisingly, ships tailored for this unique fuel also come with a heftier price tag), there’s good news, too. Maersk, the world’s largest shipping company, is eyeing ambitious carbon targets, signaling a potentially burgeoning demand for biomass-based methanol.

But marine cargo shipping isn’t just eyeing the future—it’s also looking to the past for sustainable inspiration. Sails are back in vogue! The Pyxis Ocean, the first wind-powered commercial cargo ship, is a testament to this resurgence. These modern sails, reminiscent of wind turbines, can help ships save nearly three tons of fuel daily. Even more promising, existing ships can be retrofitted with these sails, which paves the way for a future where cargo ships harness both wind power and bio-based methanol, heralding a massive reduction in shipping emissions.

Clearing the skies: AI in aviation

Now let’s shift gears to aviation. Beyond sustainable aviation fuel lies another promising avenue—the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI). 

Google and American Airlines are collaborating to harness AI-based predictions to minimize contrail formation—the cloud-like trails left behind by planes that trap heat and account for a whopping 30% of aviation’s contribution to global warming.

So where does AI come in? By leveraging vast amounts of weather data, flight paths, and satellite imagery, Google’s Climate and Energy team can predict contrail formations. Pilots can then adjust altitudes, similar to how they evade turbulence, to bypass humid layers, thus reducing contrails. Initial tests cut expected contrails by 50%.

While sustainable transportation alternatives aren’t without their challenges, the combined might of innovation, determination, and technological advances like AI paints a hopeful picture for a greener future. 

‍

Hawaii’s heartbreaking wildfire disaster

The alarming news of wildfires in Hawaii has been distressing to say the least. The fact that the fires claimed over 100 lives (a number that’s sure to climb) is deeply saddening, and our hearts go out to everyone affected. For many, it’s hard to fathom how a vibrant island like Hawaii, surrounded by water, could fall victim to such a disaster.

So, what’s causing these infernos in the middle of the Pacific Ocean? The current state of affairs has been years in the making. Over the past three decades, Hawaii has seen declining rainfall, reduced cloud cover due to soaring temperatures, and changing storm patterns. Sadly, all these shifts are linked to climate change, which resulted in the arid conditions that fuel wildfires. The region’s drought conditions cause temperatures to rise, and with less moisture to absorb the heat, it further dries out the landscape, and creates a vicious cycle. And while Hurricane Dora may not have directly hit Hawaii, its strong gusts exacerbated the wildfire situation.

It’s a chilling reminder that multiple climate events can, and often do, impact one another, leading to catastrophic outcomes.

The landmark Montana climate case

Shifting our focus to Montana, a significant legal development promises to be a beacon of hope for the climate movement. In the lawsuit, “Held v. State of Montana,” young plaintiffs have achieved a monumental win.

For those unfamiliar, the case revolved around young activists challenging the state. They asserted that by overlooking climate change in their fossil fuel projects, Montana infringed upon their constitutional right to a clean and healthful environment. The verdict? The judge ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, deeming Montana’s approval of such projects without climate change considerations unconstitutional.

This groundbreaking decision isn’t just a victory for Montana. It establishes a powerful precedent for similar cases nationwide. The ruling solidifies the long-held understanding that climate change is a manufactured, human-created issue, and its repercussions directly influence individual lives. Importantly, it fortifies the legal framework for citizens, especially younger generations, to champion their rights and the future of our planet.

States like California and New York, heralded for their ambitious climate policies, might not meet their 2030 climate targets. Why? It’s not a lack of planning or policies but rather the tortuous pace of state permitting. 

Ambitious goals, bureaucratic hurdles

Both states have set ambitious targets, including plans to ban new natural gas lines and end the sale of combustion engine cars by 2030. But one question begs to be asked: How can states with such robust environmental intentions fall short in streamlining bureaucratic processes?

But the fact remains: Permitting is essential. It serves as a protective measure, ensuring that projects undergo environmental impact assessments, adhere to existing regulations, and factor in community concerns. In permitting, you can’t differentiate renewable energy projects from conventional fossil fuel-based ones. The challenge is balancing swift renewable energy development without compromising environmental standards.

A path forward?

Addressing the bottleneck of permit approval without neglecting environmental diligence is indeed challenging. Could specialized permitting teams be trained in renewable energy projects to ensure speed and compliance? Maybe. On the state level, there are initiatives aiming to reform this process. Governor Newsom’s proposed bill seeks to reduce litigation delays, streamline review processes, and make considerations for projects in areas with endangered species.

Striking the right balance

What about environmental justice and equity? It’s crucial that permitting reforms don’t disproportionately impact vulnerable communities. History has shown us the detrimental impacts of situating power plants and waste processing factories in low-income areas, so it’s critical to ensure that localities not only bear the burden but also reap the benefits of these projects.

The under appreciated aspect of the energy transition

While technology and R&D often get the majority of the limelight when it comes to the energy transition, practical implementation is just as important. Permitting might not be the most exciting topic, but it’s critical to achieving our decarbonization goals.

In a world racing against time to mitigate climate change impacts, these types of discussions shed light on the intricacies of the journey. As we strive for a more sustainable future, these tedious details could make all the difference.

The globe is currently experiencing the ramifications of climate change as we endure soaring temperatures and severe weather patterns during the summer of 2023. Torrential rains have triggered floods and landslides in Korea, Japan, and the northeastern United States. Meanwhile, heatwaves have swept through the Mediterranean, Mexico, China, and the Southern United States. July has been logged as the most sweltering month on record, shaped by anthropogenic climate change and the influence of El Niño, which is predicted to carry over into the winter, indicating another scorching summer for the subsequent year. This climate shift has also damaged marine ecosystems, with considerable bleaching events noted in coral reefs due to increased sea surface temperatures.

Impact on the oil and gas industry

Rising global temperatures have unexpectedly led to the shutdown of oil refineries in oil-rich regions like Texas and Louisiana. The infrastructure, built under normal climatic conditions, struggles to withstand the current heat extremes. The irony lies in fossil fuel production equipment's inability to endure the warming temperatures they have helped cause. The aging and deteriorating oil and gas infrastructure has accentuated the need for renewable energy technologies. These newer systems, designed with a warming climate in mind, seem to be a more sensible investment for the future. A broader solution to combat climate change is seen in transformative decarbonization efforts.

‍

Amazon’s recent sustainability report notably expands its decarbonization ambitions into the supplier realm. By 2024, Amazon suppliers must disclose their carbon emissions and reduction goals—an unequivocal push toward its 2040 net-zero goal. Seeing initiatives leap out of the retail sector into fresh terrains—such as software and tech, with SAP’s supply chain engagement program—means companies across sectors are finally doing something. 

The newfound bid for ESG excellence includes greenhouse gas reductions from critical suppliers. What’s intriguing here are the market forces driving significant changes across the value chain. Transparency and detailed emissions reportingare rapidly becoming the norm, as retailers expect suppliers to align their efforts with customer expectations and goals. It’s a wave of change that’s set to ripple through the business ecosystem, influencing carbon reporting and ultimately driving a more sustainable future.

The mechanisms behind heat waves start with a high-pressure system that forces air to sink and heat up, which then gets trapped. Climate change enhances this effect by increasing overall heat in the atmosphere and reducing moisture on the ground that would typically absorb some of the heat. The current El Niño cycle’s impact—warmer Pacific Ocean surface water—has also contributed to the ongoing heatwave as the warmer ocean decreases heat absorption.

The worrying forecasts so far in 2023 show that we’re poised to break the heat records of 2016, and there’s a strong possibility of 2024 surpassing this year’s records as the El Niño cycle plays out. However, amidst the dire circumstances, we’re still optimistic about the promising potential that lies in mitigation strategies. For example, we’re bullish on more urban trees and increasing solar energy utilization to help bring down temperatures in the long term—especially in places like Arizona, where there’s massive potential to maximize the use of solar power year-round.

The International Energy Agency’s inaugural edition of the Critical Minerals Market Review offers intriguing insights into global energy markets as the world transitions from a fossil fuel-based system to renewable energy. While the transition has happened in significantly less time than it took to build a fossil fuel-based system (we’re already seeing record deployment of solar panels, wind turbines, and electric vehicles), it hasn’t been without challenges. The shift towards renewables and the growing demand for this technology underpin the growth in the critical minerals markets. In fact, the market size for energy transition minerals has doubled compared to 2017, making it a massive $320 billion industry.

The challenges with the energy transition are largely tied to critical mineral extraction. The demand for minerals like copper, nickel, lithium, and rare earth elements like neodymium used in electric vehicles has skyrocketed. But as market demand for these minerals grows, so must the mining industry. The mining boom raises concerns about the environmental and societal impacts of expanded mining operations. The Critical Minerals Market Review highlights an interesting tension between battery production for electric vehicles and consumer preferences, alongside potential negative implications of meeting the growing demand for minerals. While progress in improving the gender balance of workers and community investment by mining companies, concerns about worker safety, emissions, water use, and waste production persist. Furthermore, equitable access to the technology developed from these minerals for resource-rich countries remains unsolved and unanswered.

Climate change scenarios in financial services

The University of Exeter’s Institute and Faculty of Actuaries released a paper (The Emperor’s New Climate Scenarios) highlighting that commonly used climate models in financial services often underestimate the risks of climate change. It’s an area often overlooked in the discussions around climate change; however, financial services increasingly incorporate potential climate events into their risk assessments to improve their strategies. While it’s encouraging to see a willingness to understand how climate poses a material risk to company performance, the paper warns that these models often produce “artificially benign” predictions, which could pose significant economic risks.

The critical issue with these models is their failure to accurately incorporate the cost of real-world impacts of climate change. According to a survey by the Global Association of Risk Professionals, 80% of firms used climate-scenario analysis in 2022, but the models often overlooked the escalating costs of climate phenomena such as sea-level rise and crop die-off. 

Misinterpretation of these models is also prevalent due to financial firms’ lack of climate expertise. Models built on a near-term time horizon of one to five years should not be applied to longer-term decision-making, and assumptions that we are on track to meet the Paris Agreement are inaccurate. To rectify these issues, it’s recommended that models incorporate current emissions rather than assumed progress and that model creators convey what a model does and doesn’t describe. Paired with a qualitative narrative, this could bridge the gap between climate and financial experts and foster a better understanding of climate implications across industries.

‍

The Australian government has proposed a new law to enhance climate-related financial disclosures from companies and other entities operating in the country. Drawing from the recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD), the proposed legislation intends to provide investors and stakeholders with reliable information about the financial risks and opportunities associated with climate change. It is part of the government’s broader efforts to address climate change, foster sustainable economic growth, and safeguard the interests of investors and the broader financial system. The law will likely apply to larger entities, including listed companies, banks, insurers, and superannuation funds, but would also impact smaller companies over three years. 

Key features of the reporting requirements:

• Precise climate-related financial disclosures in annual reports.
• Information on the financial impact of climate-related risks and opportunities on business activities.
• Disclosure of relevant metrics and targets related to climate-related risks.

Entities are encouraged to conduct scenario analyses to assess the potential financial impacts of various climate change scenarios. Companies must also disclose information about governance processes, controls, and procedures for managing climate-related risks and opportunities. External assurance of climate-related financial disclosures is also on the table and would enhance credibility and reliability. 

The Australian government plans to phase the proposed law to allow entities time to meet the new requirements. Still, the writing is on the wall: Australia acknowledges the need for globally consistent climate-related financial disclosures. The law aims to promote cross-border consistency and reduce regulatory fragmentation by considering global reporting standards like those developed by the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB).

ISSB ’s new sustainability disclosure standards 

The International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) has introduced two new disclosure standards, IFRS S1, and IFRS S2. The two finalized standards aim to establish a global benchmark for sustainability-related disclosures for capital markets. 

IFRS S1 (General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information) centers around disclosing sustainability-related risks and opportunities across the short-, medium-, and long-term to facilitate better investor decision-making. Conversely, IFRS S2 (Climate-related Disclosures) details specific climate-related disclosures and is meant to work in tandem with IFRS S1. Both standards draw from the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) recommendations and aim to improve the quality of information available to investors and are supported by various global stakeholders, including investors, companies, policymakers, regulators, and international organizations like the IOSCO, the Financial Stability Board, G20, and G7 Leaders.

In addition to TCFD recommendations, the ISSB’s standards strive to unify and build upon existing sustainability disclosure initiatives like SASB Standards, CDSB Framework, Integrated Reporting Framework, and World Economic Forum metrics. The unification is a boon for companies already leveraging previous sustainability reporting investments because it helps tone down the complexity of multiple reporting frameworks. 

In short, these new disclosure standards promote global compatibility for financial markets. Both IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 will become effective for annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2024.

In a landmark civil case, Held v. State of Montana, 16 young individuals have charged that the state’s pro-fossil fuel policies infringe on their constitutional rights. The unique case focuses on the state constitution’s provision that demands maintenance and improvement of a clean environment for present and future generations. The litigation specifically targets the Montana Environmental Policy Act, which effectively excludes global warming from consideration in environmental assessments. 

The core of the legal battle hinges on whether climate change, a global issue, is attributable to Montana. The defense argues that a global problem like climate change cannot be the responsibility of the state. Conversely, the plaintiffs have presented testimonies stating that Montana’s contribution to climate change is both significant and quantifiable, suggesting that the problem is global and local.

In an optimal scenario, the plaintiffs seek the court’s definition of a “safe and healthful environment” where CO2 levels are below 350 parts per million, which could influence all subsequent policies the state implements. While a favorable ruling for the plaintiffs wouldn’t necessarily dictate direct remedial action from the state, it would pressure the Republican-led state legislature and potentially others around the country to uphold similar constitutional provisions. A decision is expected in the next few weeks. 

Clean air = 13.4 million sick days

The American Lung Association released a report titled “Driving to Clean Air,” highlighting the health benefits of renewable energy and electrification, specifically electric vehicles. The report highlights the premature death rates in the U.S.—between 60,000 and 300,000 annually—mainly attributable to air pollution-induced health issues like lung disease, heart disease, and other cardiovascular and respiratory illnesses. What is the most significant contributor to such health-impacting air pollution? Unsurprisingly, it’s transportation and the pervasive use of cars.

The report’s model, which includes goals of 100% electric passenger vehicles by 2035 and 100% electric medium and heavy-duty trucks by 2040, and renewable energy powering the vehicles, anticipates a dramatic decrease in pollution levels. Although these goals are ambitious, they align with national and global policies. If we do manage to hold to those goals, the study says that most pollutants would decrease by 60–90% over 30 years (2020-2050), averting around 100,000 premature deaths and saving 13.4 million sick days. The health-related savings translate to a monetary value of approximately $1.2 trillion, underscoring the broader benefits of addressing climate change.

But there’s an underlying story beyond the immediate damage caused by the wildfires. The East Coast of the U.S. experienced detrimental effects on air quality due to the fires. Prevailing winds carried the smoke from the fires, resulting in a noticeable deterioration of air quality in places like New York City and Washington D.C. Because the fires affected such populated cities in areas not used to these conditions, they prompted conversations around the personal impact of climate change. But as the particulate matter—and proverbial dust—settles, will the fires have any noticeable effect in shifting public sentimentwhen it comes to the climate crisis? 

Let’s not downplay the immediate victims, though. Thousands of Canadians have been displaced, and there’s massive damage to infrastructure by what is, in all likelihood, the worst fire season on record for the country. 

Some striking statistics: ‍

– More than 400 blazes were burning across Canada as of last Wednesday

– This year’s fire season has started earlier than usual—and it’s more aggressive, with this year’s fires already surpassing 4 million hectares in the first month 

– The United Nations predicts wildfires globally will increase in intensity by 57% by 2090, signaling a perilous new norm

Scientists correlate intensifying fire seasons with the climate crisis—studies show anthropogenic climate change has significantly increased the area of wildfires—which means global action is imperative.

If you’d like to help those affected by the Canadian wildfires, donate directly to organizations like The Canadian Red Cross and Firefighters without Borders.

The current risk assessment models in the insurance industry are no longer tenable in the face of the climate crisis. Two major insurers, State Farm and Allstate, have halted new homeowners’ policies in California. And, you guessed it, it’s because of prevailing climate change-related disasters like fires and mudslides that make payouts to policyholders unsustainable for these insurance companies. It’s part of the trickle-down effect of increased climate-driven disasters. 

In California, regulatory measures that prevent insurers from raising rates have created a dilemma. While such constraints help maintain affordable costs for homeowners, they make it difficult for insurers to cover policy costs and handle increased payouts. The scenario has culminated in more considerable insurance market risks, which must accurately reflect the true extent of climate change-induced disasters. The implications for the insurance industry are far-reaching—it will have to raise rates, risk upsetting homeowners, or potentially go out of business if regulations prevent rate increases. Furthermore, the possibility of homes becoming uninsurable can affect potential homeowners’ ability to get a mortgage.

In short: Insurance companies must adapt their pricing and risk evaluation methods to account for climate change’s increased and unpredictable risks. 

The ripple effects of the Great Atlantic Sargassum Belt

Human activities have caused an unprecedented explosion of seaweed growth, notably Sargassum seaweed, in the Atlantic Ocean. It has created what’s known as the Great Atlantic Sargassum Belt and poses unforeseen and potentially significant impacts. 

The Great Atlantic Sargassum Belt originates from nutrient-dense agricultural runoff and deforestation debris carried into the Atlantic by the Amazon River floods. It stretches from the west coast of Sierra Leone, across the Atlantic, through the Caribbean, and into the Gulf of Mexico. 

Sargassum emits hydrogen sulfide, which smells foul and can cause eye, throat, and skin irritation. That means the excessive Sargassum growth washing up on shires will continue to affect tourism. Caribbean and coastal Florida economies will need more time and money to remove seaweed from beaches. 

Worse yet, the Sargassum seaweed has become a plastic trap, making it more likely that wildlife will ingest more plastic. The plastic tangled in the seaweed also attracts a kind of bacteria called Vibrio, which can pose health risks to humans and marine life. The proliferation of Sargassum also poses an existential threat to coral reefs, physically smothering the reefs from light and oxygen. In extreme cases, large patches of Sargassum can choke desalinization plants, which happened in St. Croix and led to an 18-day state of emergency.

In a recent collaborative research paper, scientists from multiple universities, including the University of Michigan, Georgia IT, Arizona State University, Northeastern University, and the Houston School of Public Health, have raised serious concerns over heatwave power grid failures. The paper, published in the Environmental Science and Technology journal, investigated the public health risks associated with blackouts during heatwaves in major cities. This topic is relevant as major blackouts have more than doubled in the past eight years, often occurring in summer due to the high demand for electricity caused by air conditioning use. The frequency of heatwaves has nearly tripled from 2016 to 2021, increasing the strain on the power grid and heightening the risk of blackouts.

Using the cities of Atlanta, Detroit, and Phoenix as representative models for most of the country's climate zones, the researchers found some alarming potential consequences of a heatwave-triggered blackout. In Phoenix, a five-day heatwave without power could result in around 900 deaths per 100,000 people. The situation would be less severe in Detroit and Atlanta, with 31 and 1 deaths per 100,000 people, respectively. The study also showed that emergency room visits would likely overwhelm hospital capacity in Atlanta and Phoenix. However, potential improvements like increasing the number of street trees, painting rooftops with reflective material, and developing backup generation and microgrids were suggested to mitigate the impacts of such heatwaves.

Climate change in a new light: unpacking the rebranding debate and the power of relatable narratives

The second section of the transcript focused on a critical topic: the rebranding of climate change. Arnold Schwarzenegger's recent interview on CBS, where he argued that climate change should be discussed in terms of pollution to garner public concern, sparked the conversation. Schwarzenegger's statement is not a novel perspective; communication issues around climate change have been discussed for over a decade, with various entities calling for a shift in the narrative to mobilize people effectively.

The discussion brought out a few problems with Schwarzenegger's suggestion, including the likelihood that people only act on pollution issues when directly affected and the danger of dismissing CO2 as a pollutant. The concept of "creeping normalcy," or the boiling frog syndrome, was highlighted as part of the climate change communication problem, where the gradual nature of climate change impacts prevents it from being viewed as an immediate threat. Some participants suggested alternative terms like "climate emergency" or "climate crisis," better to capture the urgency and severity of the issue. Additionally, the need for communication to focus on specific, relatable impacts of climate change was emphasized.

In April, our discussion around the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation deliberating over Colorado River water withdrawals seems to have culminated in an agreement. The New York Times reported the conclusion of a rather prolonged dialogue about water cutback, initially pitched by Secretary Haaland at an estimated 2 million acre-feet per year (that’s about 650 billion gallons of water per year), the compromise lands at 3 million acre-feet over 3.5 years, a sizeable reduction despite being smaller than the initial proposition. These measures, drastic for those states involved, are a result of thoughtful negotiation and a fortuitous streak of record winter rainfall.

Now, the finer details of this arrangement reveal that only about 700,000 acre-feet of these cuts are voluntary. The rest are entangled with federal grant payments amounting to $1.2 billion from the Inflation Reduction Act, which will be funneled into tribal communities, irrigation districts, and cities willing to trim their residential and industrial water use. The question of agricultural water consumption also comes to the forefront, as it stands at 79% of the Colorado River’s water use, massively overshadowing the 12% used by residential areas. Interestingly, 55% of this huge agricultural demand feeds livestock for meat and dairy. That means a shift in dietary habits could have far-reaching environmental benefits.

Pioneering corporate nature standards: The dawn of SBTN

Let’s shift gears and focus on the Science Based Targets Network (SBTN), a consortium of over 80 organizations formed to align business operations with Earth’s ecological boundaries. The SBTN recently published its inaugural corporate standard for science-based targets for nature. This benchmark encourages companies to scrutinize and prioritize their environmental impacts across land and water parameters. It provides a solid methodology for setting targets grounded in science, thereby addressing pressing environmental issues.

The backstory of this development finds its roots in the COP 15 in Montreal, a convention dedicated to biodiversity, where governments across the globe agreed upon a Biodiversity Framework that aims to curb biodiversity loss, shield natural ecosystems, and increase biodiversity-related financing. 

Additionally, pressure from investors has led companies to assess and report on nature and biodiversity-related issues, guided by a new disclosure system—the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD). All these initiatives reflect the single materiality approach of financial materiality, which aims to safeguard nature and biodiversity and comprehend financial material risks and opportunities related to them. Despite being early days for the SBTN targets, the 17 companies involved in the pilot project show promise—it also marks a turning point in our collective approach to sustainability.

The discussion among environmental experts suggests that this rule offers a more flexible approach to achieving significant emission reductions. Still, it’s limited by the Supreme Court’s ruling, which hampers the EPA’s capacity to mandate renewable energy. The reliance on CCS and hydrogen technologies as the basis for the standards is noteworthy, given their cost. It’s a move that potentially encourages power generators to opt for cheaper renewable solutions or retire existing fossil fuel-based plants. 

While the rule sets a slow trajectory, with no requirements until 2030, the impact is significant—it aims to reduce CO2 emissions by ten million metric tons in 2028 compared to the previous year. The hope is that this approach will drive the retirement of some coal-fired power plants while avoiding the need for expensive retrofits. Despite the challenges, the EPA highlights the broader benefits, including preventing 300 premature deaths due to air pollution and producing up to $85 billion in benefits from avoided climate change and health impacts by 2030.

The frequency and severity of climate disasters have increased significantly in recent years, and insurance companies and home and property owners are footing the bill. The number of events that cause $1 billion or more in damage has reached an average of 20 per year, compared to 2–4 per year in the 1980s. 

As insurance companies struggle to cover the rising costs, insured homeowners across the U.S. face the consequences—the national average for property coverage has doubled since the early 2000s. This has led many homeowners, particularly in high-risk states like Florida and California, to forgo insurance coverage due to the high costs. That means they’re on the hook for the full cost of a climate disaster directly affecting their property. In response, insurance companies have started to pull out of high-risk areas, causing potential issues for property owners and prompting differing state-level responses.

The increased premiums also affect renters—owners of commercial properties or, say, apartment buildings that face these additional costs often pass them onto tenants. The surge in climate events and corresponding insurance reactions underscore the broader societal implications of climate inaction.

The popularity of the Inflation Reduction Act

The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), a signature climate law of President Biden, has seen significant utilization and investment since its enactment eight months ago. The law, which contains substantial incentives and investment to encourage the growth of renewable energy technologies, has spurred over $150 billion in clean energy projects, outpacing expectations by about 50%. Interestingly, the majority of these investments are happening in the South and Midwest—areas typically associated with declining industry—and in Republican districts despite none of them voting for the law.

However, the Act’s success has led to budgetary concerns due to the use of tax credits beyond expectations. Initial estimates suggested the IRA would cost about $400 billion over ten years, but updated figures from the budget office suggest it could cost 50% more, or around $600 billion. Republicans in the House, citing fiscal responsibility, are trying to roll back many parts of the law, leading to a potential risk for the IRA’s future. However, experts caution that the current surge of investment might stabilize in the coming years as demand for these technologies stabilizes, potentially curbing the projected costs.

Scientists have recorded the highest global ocean surface temperature ever. Temperatures reached 21.1°C last month—that’s just shy of 70°F—surpassing the previous record of 21°C in 2016. While the increase may seem small, it will undoubtedly impact ecological services and ecosystems. Oceans play a crucial role in regulating global temperatures by circulating heat from the equator toward the poles. The rise in ocean temperatures contributes to sea level rise, threatening U.S. coastal communities like South Florida, where it’s expected that miles of coastline will be lost in the coming decades.

Inland communities will also feel the effects of increased ocean temperatures through intensified marine heat waves, which can devastate ecosystems and disrupt food sources and economies. Warmer waters also fuel stronger storms, and the interaction with El Niño and La Niña cycles can exacerbate these threats. An El Niño cycle, for example, can bring warmer, dryer weather to the Northern U.S. and increased flooding to the Southeast.

EU’s carbon border tax potential

New research from environmental economy groups across Leiden University, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact, and Ecologic Institute suggests that the revenue impact of the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) could be much more significant than initially estimated. The CBAM is an import carbon tariff designed to prevent domestic companies from shifting production to regions with less stringent climate policies. The researchers evaluated various implementation scenarios for the tariff and found that in the least ambitious form, it would impact 83 megatons of CO2—that’s the equivalent of removing over 18 million passenger vehicles from the road in a year or powering 10 million homes. And the most aggressive scenario? Well, that could cover over 1,500 megatons of CO2.

The implementation details of the tax are yet to be determined, but one concern is the potential impact on export-related economies in developing nations. Rather than exempting economically vulnerable countries, the researchers recommend using the revenue generated by the border tax to invest in low and middle-income countries to develop clean industries. This would help facilitate a global transition to net-zero while supporting countries most impacted by climate change, like Africa, Southeast Asia, and Latin America.

This week, the U.S. Supreme Court declined appeals from Exxon Mobil, Suncor Energy, and Chevron to move lawsuits against them to federal courts. The companies are facing five separate cases from the state of Rhode Island and municipalities in Maryland, Colorado, California, and Hawaii. These lawsuits claim that the oil companies concealed and misrepresented the dangers of burning fossil fuels and violated consumer protection laws. Many of the municipalities seek to recover money for climate-related disasters. The Supreme Court’s denial deals a significant blow to the oil companies’ efforts—a win for the plaintiffs, who now expect the companies to defend themselves in front of local juries.

Although this ruling appears to be in stark contrast to the Supreme Court’s decision last year to limit the EPA’s control over power plant emissions, it’s important to note that this is more of a procedural ruling and not indicative of the court’s position on the lawsuits at hand. Keeping these cases at the state level is likely in the best interests of all parties involved.

AI’s environmental impact

The outsized impact that large AI models like ChatGPT have on the environment has gained recent attention. With their meteoric rise in tech and beyond, generative pre-trained transformers (GPT)—a subset of large language models—have come under scrutiny due to their substantial carbon emissions. MIT Technology Review found that a single large model can emit carbon equivalent to what several hundred acres of trees would sequester in a year. 

The emissions from AI across sectors are now comparable to those of the aviation industry—it’s mainly due to the amount of data and computation required to train these models and the energy-intensive data centers in which they operate. Some solutions to reduce AI’s environmental impact include moving training to cleaner data centers, like those powered by hydroelectric energy, and sharing models in a more open-source manner to reduce the need for additional training. However, the proprietary nature of these models makes this less likely. There are calls for a federal body to oversee the development and use of AI, which could also help develop rules to reduce the emissions impact of AI. 

While AI has the potential to compensate for its environmental impact through emissions reductions in other sectors, it’s essential to consider other environmental factors, such as water use, lithium, and environmental justice, as their proliferation continues to progress.

Because Earth Day is so well publicized, it affords companies and individuals the opportunity to see what others are doing and get inspired. This year, Earthday.org, which organizes Earth Day’s annual themes, has landed on “Invest in our Planet,” encouraging everyone to invest their time, effort, and money to ensure a sustainable future.

Earth Day is an opportunity for businesses to launch or revive sustainability efforts. Meaningful engagement with employees and other stakeholders can lead to long-term benefits in reducing environmental impact. 

But Earth Day is also a time to stay vigilant. 

During Earth Day, some companies may offer limited-time promotions, special “eco-friendly” products, or claim to donate to environmental causes for every sale. While these efforts can raise awareness and contribute to environmental causes, it’s essential to be cautious and research a company’s overall sustainability practices and policies. If a company’s Earth Day promotion appears to be an isolated event rather than part of a broader, ongoing commitment to sustainability, it might be an example of greenwashing.

‍

The seven states with a say in water withdrawal agreements—Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming—failed to come to an agreement last year. And now there are two new proposals, one from California and the other from the rest of the states. 

The Bureau of Reclamation has presented three options for water distribution from the Colorado River, including taking no action after the current guidelines expire in 2026, which would have severe consequences for hydropower production and 30 tribal nations. One of the other options favors California, and the other equally distributes cuts among the lower basin states. 

The proportional cuts in one proposal (you guessed it, not California’s) would result in California’s farmers experiencing significant hardships and interfere with water rights that California does not want to give up. Arizona would face larger cuts in California’s proposal due to its lower ranking in water rights seniority.

Expect legal challenges regardless of the option. Secretary Deb Haaland is expected to make a decision after public comment, with a final version set to be released in August.

How’d we get here? 

Despite record-breaking levels of rain and snow in California, it is unlikely to have a significant impact on the drought, which has been ongoing for more than two decades. 

How do we adapt?

Adapting to less water use is necessary, and the option for financial incentives for farmers to forego planting certain crops is on the table. However, the price of water needs to increase to reflect the precious, at-risk nature of the resource, similar to any other commodity. If water costs remain low, it may result in mandatory restrictions in the future. 

Improved irrigation practices, crop selection, and gray water use can significantly reduce water use. Still, we need to address other fundamental issues, like reduced animal agriculture, food waste, and the ability to grow feed crops in deserts.

Because cocoa can only grow in specific tropical conditions, it puts economic pressure on countries to escalate deforestation for cocoa production, leading to concerns about pesticide use, biodiversity loss, and soil degradation. The Chocolate Scorecard also addresses sustainability issues in the chocolate industry, including the environment and human rights. 

Countries that produce cocoa tend to have weaker labor laws, leading to child labor issues. Over 1.5 million children are estimated to be involved in the cocoa industry in Ghana and the Ivory Coast, the countries responsible for over half of the world’s cocoa. The opaque supply chains feeding the chocolate industry make traceability and accountability difficult, and this opacity provides convenient cover for the $60 billion chocolate industry to continue to procure cocoa cheaply.

The scorecard’s ranking focuses on traceability, living income, child labor, deforestation, climate, agroforestry, and agrichemical management. Companies that monitor their compliance with anti-deforestation policies receive higher scores. The scorecard also considers if companies have set science-based targets and are progressing towards them. 

Brands like Original Beans and Tony’s rank at the top, while Kellogg’s, Starbucks, and Godiva sit at the bottom. Cadbury chose not to respond to the scorecard survey. So the next time you grab a bar, check the Chocolate Scorecard. 

United Airlines announced a $15 million investment in carbon capture and sustainable fuel efforts with the Canadian company Svante. The investment is part of United’s Sustainable Flight Fund, which aims to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 without relying on offsets. Unlike traditional biofuel alternatives, Svante manufactures a carbon capture filter that compresses captured carbon for jet fuel production.

Decarbonizing the aviation industry is considered one of the hardest sectors to tackle. Sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) is seen as the favored solution, but it is expensive and currently limited to a 50/50 blend with conventional jet fuel. United’s investment in Svante represents progress in sustainable aviation fuel innovation, which is critical for reducing the industry’s staggering carbon footprint.

The White House 2024 budget proposal puts climate tech front and center

The White House has released its requested budget for 2024, which includes $6.8 trillion in spending, with a focus on climate tech. The proposed budget includes $1 billion for fusion technology R&D, $905 million for clean energy jobs in fossil fuel communities, and $52 billion for industrial decarbonization. The budget also includes funding for clean transportation, offshore wind projects, and supply chain enhancements for clean technologies. However, the budget proposal is seen as unrealistic and has little chance of passing a Republican House.

The proposed budget includes a strong focus on climate mitigation, with significant investments in various packages like equity and environmental justice, jobs, manufacturing, and R&D. The proposed funding is meant to position the U.S. to embrace the transition toward net-zero, with a focus on investing in the middle class and working families.

The report warns that the planet has already warmed by 1.1ºC and is expected to warm by 1.5ºC by 2030, leading to climate-related crises like famine, heat illness, and infectious diseases.

The report calls for immediate and sustained action to address this issue, including eliminating carbon emissions by 2040, investing in CCS tech, implementing sustainable diets, and minimizing fossil fuel use from flying and driving.

The barriers to adaptation include a lack of political will, low climate literacy, and insufficient mobilization of finance, among others.

The report emphasizes the need for effective policies and regulations to cut emissions and address these barriers to adaptation.