CCRcorp Sites  

The CCRcorp Network unlocks access to a world of insights, research, guides and information in a range of specialty areas.

Our Sites

TheCorporateCounsel

TheCorporateCounsel.net

A basis for research and practical guidance focusing on federal securities laws, compliance & corporate governance.

DealLawyers

DealLawyers.com

An educational service that provides practical guidance on legal issues involving public and private mergers & acquisitions, joint ventures, private equity – and much more.

CompensationStandards

CompensationStandards.com

The “one stop” resource for information about responsible executive compensation practices & disclosure.

Section16.net

Section16.net

Widely recognized as the premier online research platform providing practical guidance on issues involving Section 16 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and all of its related rules.

PracticalESG

PracticalESG.com

Keeping you in-the-know on environmental, social and governance developments

Back in March, I wrote about the GHG Protocol’s plans to alter its methodology on Scope 2 emissions calculations. Those changes would tighten requirements around the use of Renewable Energy Credits (RECs). Groups like Share Action have supported the amendments; however, not everyone agrees. A group of 66 signatories representing over 33,500 organizations recently issued a public statement opposing the revisions. In it, they state:

“We strongly urge the GHGP to improve upon the existing guidance, but not stymie critical electricity decarbonization investments by mandating a change that fundamentally threatens participation in this voluntary market, which acts as the linchpin in decarbonization across nearly all sectors of the economy. The revised guidance must encourage more clean energy procurement and enable more impactful corporate action, not unintentionally discourage it.”

In part, the signatories advocate for making hourly and deliverability matching optional rather than mandatory. They argue that the GHG protocol’s methods for calculating scope 2 emissions have been successful to date, and while there may be room for improvement, the proposed changes would go too far.

The signatories include several major operating companies, including Amazon and Apple, who would face potential financial hardship in complying with the new rules while maintaining their current carbon goals.  However, carbon accounting groups like Ceres and the Sustainability Roundtable have also voiced their opposition. Companies have been using the GHG Protocol’s Scope 2 methodology since 2015, and a shakeup of this caliber is likely to disrupt many longstanding plans and strategies.

Our members can learn more about GHG reporting here.

Interested in a membership with access to the complete range of benefits and resources? Sign up now and take advantage of our no-risk “100-Day Promise” – during the first 100 days as an activated member, you may cancel for any reason and receive a full refund. But it will probably pay for itself before then. Members also save hours of research and reading time each week by using our filtered and curated library of ESG/sustainability resources covering over 100 sustainability subject areas – updated daily with practical and credible information.

Practical Guidance for Companies, Curated for Clarity.

Back to all blogs

The Editor

Zachary Barlow is a licensed attorney. He earned his JD from the University of Mississippi and has a bachelor’s in Public Policy Leadership. He practiced law at a mid-size firm and handled a wide variety of cases. During this time he assisted in overseeing compliance of a public entity and litigated contract disputes, gaining experience both in and outside of the courtroom. Zachary currently assists the PracticalESG.com editorial team by providing research and creating content on a spectrum of ESG… View Profile