Corporate net zero is not a target

I think we got net zero wrong. With a few notable exceptions it is not something companies can achieve on their own. Parts of it companies can affect, but a large share of emissions are dependent on system change outside of company control.

But it was still good that thousands of companies set them. Because now we have something binding them to the global transiton. A net zero target is an implicit promise to help build the world the target assumes.

I launch a new paper today, written by me and Claire Wigg at Exponential Roadmap Initiative: Build the World Your Net Zero Target Assumes: A Framework for Action Over Accounting.

We propose that companies split their net zero targets into what they can deliver under existing conditions (the unconditional part) and what depends on the wider system changing (the conditional part). System change work follow from the target itself.

The paper also provides a mapping framework for companies to determine where emissions fall on an agency and economic feasibility map, and which actions align with which emissions.

This does not neatly fit onto GHG Scopes. Many emission sources within Scope 3 can lie within corporate control, and emissions in Scope 1 outside of control, for instance due to affordability. Where emissions end up will differ a lot between sectors.

Those that can afford it, can use carbon removal to meet their full scope targets and cover all four quadrants above. And they should be encouraged to. However, that won't be possible for the companies with the largest emissions. There we should judge climate ambition on what they company does to help build the world their target assumes, even if it doesnt show up in their GHG inventory.

Thanks for reading Marginal Carbon! This post is public so feel free to share it.

Share