Opinion by Mathew Carr
April 26, 2024
SBTi should have made this move (see link below) two years ago when it said it would.
SBTi became a dangerous distraction. Indeed it always was.
Yet …if environmental lobby groups are now dropping their aversion to letting people make money as they save the climate … because of SBTi … that’s a good thing.
Politicians using SBTi as cover for their inaction will go down in history as one of the most shameful examples of predatory delay of climate action … by any group of globally influential people.
Countries fight to stave off heat deaths
X
Key bits from Reuters
“The world faces a stark reality: thousands of companies have now made commitments to cut their emissions in half by 2030 and reach net zero by 2050. Yet the money hasn’t followed. While the number of companies committed to SBTi targets increased by more than 500% from 2018 to 2023, annual corporate climate finance increased only 5% during this same period, from $183 billion, opens new tab to $192 billion, opens new tab.
…
“Take for example sustainable aviation fuels – a critical yet nascent innovation that must scale rapidly to support the phase-out the use of fossil fuels globally. It is a high-integrity – and expensive – solution, currently costing companies upwards of $600 per tonne. While an increasing number of companies are willing to invest, they have made it clear they need assurance that these investments will contribute to their existing commitments to deploy capital at scale. Currently this assurance does not exist within SBTi, meaning companies are withholding their investments and the movement to phase out fossil fuels is being slowed.”
——-
…in other words SBTi protects crude oil…until now maybe… but governments will need to make climate action mandatory IMO.
It can’t be left to prevaricating ngos like SBTi.