Stay informed with free updates
Simply sign up to the Climate change myFT Digest — delivered directly to your inbox.
The world’s leading arbiter of corporate climate targets has taken a step back after a staff revolt over its endorsement of controversial carbon credits as a means to address greenhouse gas emissions.
The Science Based Targets initiative issued a statement on Friday saying there was “no change” to its standards, after three days earlier stating that companies would be able to use carbon offsets to meet their climate goals.
The decision to allow offsets was backed by SBTi funder the Bezos Earth Fund, a significant supporter of an US effort to boost the market for carbon credits in return for the replacement of energy systems powered by fossil fuels.
Luiz Amaral, SBTi’s chief executive, said in a meeting with members of its technical council that the group’s guidance had not changed, and a formal draft set of rules on carbon offsetting could be expected in July, according to an email received by staff on Friday.
Voluntary carbon credits are meant to represent a tonne of carbon removed or reduced from the atmosphere, for example through tree-planting projects. But the critical issue of how permanently the carbon is stored is debatable, as well as the risk of double counting.
The policy on offsets was made by the board without the consultation of SBTi’s technical and advisory groups, members of those groups said in a letter sent to trustees on Friday.
The SBTi statement said that any changes to standards would follow governance procedures including public consultation.
A broad range of interests, including companies and financial services groups, have attempted for several years to develop voluntary carbon markets to in essence pay for the shift to clean energy.
These are separate to the regulated market for permits issued by governments that allow a limited amount of carbon dioxide emissions from large polluters, such as steel and cement and industrial manufacturers.
“The SBTi is a learning organisation, as it is moving from an initiative to a voluntary standard-setter,” it said in a statement to the Financial Times, adding there had been a “misunderstanding” of its position on offsets.
Read the full article here