2020 was a year that will be remembered most for the challenges and losses it
brought to so many of us. However, the COVID-19 pandemic put a spotlight on
climate action and created momentum that may well set 2021 up to be the real
tipping point we’ve been expecting.
In particular, voluntary action by companies to reduce and offset emissions
continued despite the economic
downturn and is poised to
continue growing at a significant pace in 2021. Concurrently, new solutions for
carbon mitigation are emerging that need support in order to scale. The uptick
in corporate activity to reduce carbon through
credits
can help finance the growth and implementation of these new efforts.
While there is no substitute for companies taking direct action to reduce their
emissions and remove carbon from the atmosphere by evolving their own products
and processes, the market is recognition of the fact that solutions for all
business use cases may not yet exist — or may not be mature enough to accomplish
all of the reductions a company needs to complete in order to achieve carbon
neutral/net
zero.
In the meantime, carbon credits foster new solutions and make a valuable impact
on emissions.
Here, we take a look at some of the major trends driving that action, as well as
new ways of solving the impact of carbon emissions.
Big climate trends shaping corporate action
Awareness and support for sustainability among both companies and consumers is
increasingly becoming mainstream. In terms of government action, recent
polling
shows that 2 out of 3 Americans want the government to “do more” about the
environment. The new administration has taken note: President Biden has
already taken steps to rejoin the Paris
Agreement,
and has pledged to invest $2 trillion over the next 10 years in a long list of
climate-related projects (Download South Pole’s briefing on the topic
here). Even during the past
administration, with little government leadership on climate, many companies
doubled down on their own
commitments — and shifting
in their business practices and product portfolios, and demonstrating their own
leadership in the process.
In recognition of shared challenges, companies are also becoming more open to
collaborating, both with NGOs and with each other. Partnerships, such as the
Marine Stewardship Council, Renewable Energy Buyers
Alliance, The Climate
Collaborative and many others, have
demonstrated successful outcomes. Swiss retail chain COOP’s collaboration with
WWF
is a good example. Such collaboration is proving highly effective in addressing
urgent problems by combining the expertise, awareness and presence of NGOs in
problem areas with the resources and support of corporations who are feeling
stakeholder pressure to find ways to meet some of their environmental and social
justice commitments.
The energy transition is also well underway. Renewable energy has grown at the
“blistering” pace of 13.7 percent annually over the past
decade.
Renewables are now the least expensive way to produce electricity nearly
everywhere. While this is a critical development, it’s not nearly enough to keep
up with the growth of global emissions linked to millions of people moving out
of poverty and becoming energy consumers, many switching on electric lights and
driving cars for the first time.
Businesses will play a role in driving the use of renewable
energy across
their supply chains and adopting energy-saving measures —such as encouraging
greener forms of
transport,
more energy-efficient appliances; and growing consumer awareness of how they
contribute to climate change, and how they can change their
diets
and habits to lower emissions.
Net-zero targets and emerging climate solutions
The biggest trend among companies setting specific climate action targets is the
emergence of net
zero emissions.
When it comes to climate leadership, there is no substitute for companies
actively reducing their emissions across their entire supply chain. But
businesses also recognize that reaching net zero can take time — for example,
switching contracts to renewable energy suppliers, or collecting methane
emissions from landfills. Both require infrastructure changes — and so they
recognize that they must simultaneously make the most of robust climate finance
solutions at their disposal today, while proactively planning to adopt new
low-carbon technologies.
The term “net zero” has been around since 2013, when it was coined at a meeting
of
women,
including former UNFCCC Executive Secretary Christiana Figueres, who
were making plans for the 2015 Paris Climate Summit. The term grew out of the
recognition that there was no longer time to rein in climate change by simply
cutting emissions, as the concentration in the atmosphere was already too high
while the rate of decline was hardly budging — especially in sectors where
carbon-free options did not yet exist.
A careful analysis of the situation recognized that there were not one, but two,
controls that could be applied to reduce atmospheric carbon levels. The first
was to directly reduce the amount of carbon emissions. The second would be to
increase the rate at which carbon is withdrawn from the atmosphere. By working
the problem from both ends, we greatly increase our chances to reach the point
where the amount of carbon we emit is not more than the amount being absorbed.
According to the IPCC, if we can achieve net zero globally by 2050, we have
a decent chance of limiting warming to
1.5°C.
Over the past 15 months, a sizable number of organizations — ranging from Mastercard,
Ford and Microsoft to the
Church of England — have committed to achieving net-zero emissions anywhere
between 2030 and 2050. According to Ricard Mattison, CEO of S&P Global
Trucost, some 1,400 new
companies have
committed to net
zero
during the past year. Most recently, the Biden administration has affirmed its
commitment to achieving net zero on the national level by 2050.
When the 2015 Paris Agreement featured the idea of net zero as one of its key
elements, a challenge was that preserving and regenerating
forests
— one of the most effective and cost-efficient ways to remove CO2 from the
atmosphere — was still not happening on a large scale around the world. Even
today, deforestation continues as a result of unsustainable industry and farming
practices, and
wildfires.
Nature-based solutions
You can’t beat Mother Nature for simplicity and grace. No human endeavor to date
has yet to embody the comprehensive, extravagantly integrated approach that
underscores literally every natural system.
Trees and plants absorb CO2 from the air and incorporate it into their structure
as wood — while providing habitat for thousands of organisms, preventing
erosion, and enhancing soil health, just to name a few of the multiple
functions. At a time when rampant deforestation is destroying ecosystems at a
breathtaking rate, a number of organizations are working to protect, restore and
expand forests, prairies, peatlands, mangroves and other natural carbon sinks,
with many of these activities funded through carbon
credits.
Because of the highly integrative character of natural systems, many of these
efforts, like the natural systems they are striving to protect, have numerous
co-benefits
— such as biodiversity, social justice, and sustainable development.
Nature-based carbon-removal solutions also tend to be less expensive than
man-made ones. Some examples of nature-based solutions we’re pursuing at South
Pole — ranging from forest protection to fire prevention, wildlife conservation,
soil regeneration and many more — can be found
here.
Engineered solutions
At the other end of the spectrum are technological solutions — basically
machines or processes that literally suck carbon out of the air. Several
companies, including Carbon Engineering,
Global Thermostat, and
Climeworks have developed machines that draw air
through various types of filters that can extract CO2 so that it can either be
sequestered or utilized in products such as
concrete,
carbon-negative
ethanol
and high-tech
polymers.
Solutions such as these are getting a boost from Elon
Musk,
who recently announced a $100 million prize “for the best carbon-capture
technology.”
The challenge with engineered solutions is that they are still new, unproven and
very expensive. However, in time, they could potentially remove carbon more
quickly than natural processes (as much as 1,000 times
faster,
according to Arizona State University professor Klaus Lackner) and take
up less space than forests; and since the machines are man-made, we could,
theoretically, produce as many of them as the economics would allow. New
York-based Global Thermostat, led by Nobel Prize winner Graciela
Chichilnisky,
has now partnered with
Exxon-Mobil,
which certainly has plenty of financial muscle to lend to the effort.
However, the biggest bang for the buck is still in forest protection; and with
limited budgets for climate action, it still seems reasonable to spend the money
on protecting and planting trees vs building new machines.
Hybrid solutions
Then, there are a variety of solutions that combine natural processes with human
intervention. These range from
biochar (slow-burning biomass,
then burying it to improve the soil), to combining biofuel with carbon capture
(BECCS),
to enhanced
weathering
— in which certain minerals that absorb CO2 are exposed to the air (such as the
Stripe-funded olivine
beach),
or turning captured CO2 into durable materials.
Other hybrid solutions include encouraging the use of more
wood
in construction in place of more carbon-intensive materials such as steel or
concrete.
Perhaps the most important hybrid solution right now lies in agriculture. Today,
scientists have recognized the enormous potential for large-scale carbon
removal
that can be achieved by simply restoring soil health. Improved understanding of
soil biology has led to the awareness that certain traditional agricultural
practices – such as
tilling
— release large amounts of carbon. Climate-smart agriculture helps to reverse
that and leave the carbon in the soil, while also improving the quality of the
soil itself, resulting in higher yields. We now know that globally, soil
contains four times as much carbon as the atmosphere or the entirety of
terrestrial
vegetation.
Much of that carbon has been released by conventional agriculture but can be
restored using alternative methods. That awareness has led to a renaissance of
"regenerative
agriculture."
Debbie Reed, Executive Director of the Ecosystem Services Market
Consortium, has been working on
greenhouse gas remediation in agriculture since long before it became
fashionable. Indeed, it wasn't that long ago that large-scale agriculture was
viewed as nothing but trouble for the environment.
Our job, Reed says, "is to figure out what are the new outcomes that society
wants from agriculture. That could be greenhouse gas mitigation, improved water
quality, etc. What we are quantifying in our program is impact on soil carbon;
net greenhouse gas emissions — including nitrous oxide, carbon dioxide and
methane; water quality, water use/conservation, and biodiversity.” Reed
estimates conservatively that promoting soil health on farms and ranches can
sequester on average roughly a half ton per acre per year of greenhouse gas
emissions.
The role of voluntary corporate climate action
The hope is that many of these solutions will become a part of mainstream
industry and as such, will eventually attract investment. However, right now
they require funding, which is where the voluntary carbon
markets
come in. The financing challenge here is substantial. Not only do we need to
transform our entire economy, we need to do so urgently.
A key enabler for many companies is the growth of the voluntary carbon market
and formalization of principles under which the market will operate. The
Taskforce on Scaling Voluntary Carbon Markets wrote in its recent
report,
"every company, every bank, every insurer and investor will have to adjust their
business models, develop credible plans for the transition and implement them."
In the report, the Task Force lays out carbon market principles and taxonomy,
reference contracts, and a blueprint for managing trades, financing and data;
and perhaps most importantly, maintaining the integrity of the market.
The integrity issue is crucial and all programs must be carefully validated and
certified. The evolution of standards and consolidation of third-party
verification agencies — such as Gold
Standard, Verra's
Verified Carbon Standard, Social
Carbon and Climate, Community and Biodiversity
Standards, or
standards verified by the UNFCCC —
highlights the fact that as the market matured, it has become increasingly
rigorous.
The carbon market provides a mechanism to direct funding expediently to these
early-stage ventures, by connecting the growing demand on the part of companies
and consumers committing to net zero, with the small but growing supply of
removal and avoidance solutions.
Given the urgency of the matter, carbon credits make the most of what is
possible and available now. The fact is, our chances of meeting the Paris
targets would be significantly lower without them.
Get the latest insights, trends, and innovations to help position yourself at the forefront of sustainable business leadership—delivered straight to your inbox.
Published Apr 19, 2021 8am EDT / 5am PDT / 1pm BST / 2pm CEST