Ruxandra Creosteanu

🌡️ What happens if we exceed the Paris Agreement’s 1.5 °C limit? and how do we bring temperatures back down? Overshoot is the term used for scenarios where global warming temporarily surpasses 1.5 °C before being lowered again through deep emission cuts and large-scale carbon removal. The first-ever international conference on climate overshoot was held in Laxenburg, Austria to explore one of the most uncomfortable questions in climate science. 🌱 Net-negative is the new net-zero. Limiting warming in the long term means removing more CO₂ than we emit. Yet, most countries still lack quantified net-negative targets. 🧪 Carbon removal is a necessity not a licence to delay. It must “enable ambition,” not excuse inaction, and we urgently need more knowledge about its risks, impacts, and equity dimensions. ⚖️ Overshoot has irreversible consequences. Even a temporary exceedance could trigger glacier melt, species extinction, and sea-level rise. A 0.1–0.3 °C overshoot could lead to 15 % more heat-related deaths this century. 📜 Ambition must remain high, and nations will likely be expected to go beyond net-zero. Delayed action today means heavier burdens and greater legal liability tomorrow. Communicating this reality is one of our greatest challenges. How do we explain that 1.5 °C remains the goal even if we cross it? The answer is by making it clear that overshoot is the emergency response to decades of insufficient action. 🌍 The message is sobering but empowering: We have not lost the fight but winning now requires removing as much as we emit, repairing what we’ve damaged, and protecting what we still can. The era of overshoot is not an excuse for delay. It’s a call to radical ambition — faster, fairer, and deeper than ever before. Read more the Carbon Brief coverage: https://lnkd.in/eHCCFD4g

138

29 Kommentarer

EU Taxonomy vs. ESG Ratings – From Green Intentions to Green Impact I recently came across this study on the EU Taxonomy Regulation and found it really interesting. It sheds light on how markets respond differently to Taxonomy alignment compared to traditional ESG ratings. 🔎 Key insights: > Companies with higher EU Taxonomy alignment (revenues from sustainable activities) enjoy a market premium. > Investor attention matters > Traditional ESG ratings did not explain these market effects. 💡 Why the difference? ESG ratings focus on firm-level policies, disclosures, and governance. They can vary widely across providers and often reward communication as much as impact. EU Taxonomy defines sustainability at the activity level using strict, science-based thresholds. It requires firms to disclose the share of revenue, capex, and opex aligned with six environmental objectives (es: climate change mitigation and adaptation; Circular Economy) ⚖️ Limitations & future research: > The Taxonomy currently centers on environmental objectives, leaving the S& G dimensions less defined. > The study focused on the early implementation phase, future research can explore whether the alignment premium persists over time. 🚀 Takeaway: The EU Taxonomy shifts the lens from green intentions to green impact. For investors, regulators, and companies, this offers a much clearer framework - and it’s only the beginning of how sustainable finance will evolve.

72

5 Kommentarer

2026 will be a landmark year for whole-life carbon in Europe's buildings! Just before summer the European Commission published guidance for member states on implementing the EPBD Recast, (Annex 13 if you want to google it). The key points are that every member state has to map out how and when they’ll measure and cap carbon in new buildings. 🔹 Roadmaps due end of 2026, this will require lots of data! 🔹 Carbon limits kick in 2028 (large buildings) & 2030 (all new) at the latest! 🔹 Some are already far ahead, Denmark is on version two of its limits 💪 And by the end of this year we’ll get the EU’s harmonised method for life-cycle GWP – this will be a key document that should help to drive consistency and harmonisation across the region and beyond! I’ll be presenting on this along with Marios Tsikos from One Click LCA in a free webinar: 🎯 Designing for EPBD: Whole-life carbon disclosure & limits in construction projects 📅 Tuesday 30 September • 10:00 CEST 👉 Save your spot: https://lnkd.in/d-Wpb6St? #Decarbonisation #EPBD

128

16 Kommentarer

From a source at EFRAG: the draft exposure standard for the simplified ESRS will be published tomorrow or the day after. EFRAG had previously stated that the draft would be released “the last week of July,” and following last week’s open SRB meeting, it seems they’re sticking to that timeline. Once it's out, there will be a 60 day public consultation period lasting until the end of September. During this period, all stakeholders can provide feedback. What we’re going to see is significant. Key details from the revised draft include: – 58% reduction in mandatory data points – Nearly all “May” data points eliminated – Combined, that’s close to a 66% overall cut This is a serious shift. We're about to witness what the proposed future of European ESG reporting will look like. Will post the ESRS draft exposure as soon as it's live.

97

1 Kommentar

The Voluntary reporting standard for SMEs (VSME) will/can/might be the new default way of sustainability reporting for SMEs and mid-sized companies in Europe, given the drastically reduced scope of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD). What climate-related metrics do companies need to report under the VSME? 👉 In the Basic Module (B3) - Total energy consumption (renewable vs. non-renewable) - GHG emissions: scope 1 and scope 2 location-based - GHG intensity - Optionally, scope 3 GHG emissions if appropriate 👉 In the Comprehensive Module (C3, C4) - GHG reduction targets for scope 1 and 2 (scope 3 is optional, see above) - Climate risks and their potential impact on financial performance Personally, I’m relieved to see that core climate metrics are embedded in the VSME (as-is emissions, targets and risk assessments). However, the optional nature and vagueness around scope 3 reporting remains a disappointment. Source: https://lnkd.in/eKAPJgfV

48

7 Kommentarer

Sustainability can be hard. But it doesn’t have to be! Just follow these absolutely awful tips. 👉 Set 2050 targets with no interim milestones. This gives you the flexibility to wait up to 25 years with doing reductions. And by that time, the problems have probably solved themselves. 👉 Focus on branding, not behavior. Getting a new slogan and a green gradient in the logo is much more cost-efficient than actual actions. 👉 Always start with the short-term business case. If saving the planet doesn’t boost quarterly earnings, it’s probably not worth doing 👉 Avoid talking to operations teams. Too messy and often leads to long discussions. High-level strategy decks are superior and avoids the uncomfortable realities. 👉 Don’t calculate scope 3 emissions. Why account for emissions that happen outside your own four walls? (I see that some EU politicians have been taking notes here 🙃) You’re welcome!

51

8 Kommentarer

Climate Transition Plan? Sounds fancy, but most companies panic when they see. Is it a net-zero plan? A decarbonisation roadmap? A strategy deck? It’s actually none of the above. It’s broader, simpler, and (thanks to the great guidance by CDP) less overwhelming than most people think. I put together a quick carousel to show you: • what a climate transition plan really is, • what the latest guidance suggests for companies to follow • how to avoid the most common traps. • The thing is that if your plan looks like a wishlist instead of a business blueprint, it won’t survive first contact with reality. Swipe through 👇 and let me know: What’s been your biggest challenge with climate transition planning so far?”

54

5 Kommentarer

♻️ The #CircularEconomy is much more than the opposite to the "take-make-dispose" linear model. The loops have to be designed with certain characteristics. Here is my pitch. When I speak with governments or businesses, I try to shift the focus away from simply comparing circular economy to the linear model we all know. Instead, I invite people to visualize the loops — the flow of products and materials through production, use, reuse, disposal, and reintegration. But that’s just the beginning. A truly circular economy doesn’t just loop -it loops with intention. Here's how: 🔄 1. Loops are slow Design products to last. Circularity is not about keeping waste moving quickly—it’s about keeping materials and products in use for as long as possible. Durability, repairability, and reuse come first. 🎯 2. Loops are lean Only essential resources should be used—nothing extra. This is where sufficiency matters most, especially in high-consumption economies. You can't bend massive material flows—you must reduce them. 🏘️ 3. Loops are local Circular systems work best when waste and resources flow within local or regional ecosystems. No long-distance waste exports. Communities should benefit directly from the value kept in the loop. ☣️ 4. Loops are clean Toxic materials have no place in a circular system. They harm health, pollute ecosystems, and disrupt recycling by contaminating resource streams. 🌞 5. Loops are powered sustainably Circularity must run on renewable energy and make use of regenerative materials. It’s not circular if it relies on fossil inputs. 🌱 6. Loops are regenerative Most importantly, circularity should restore and improve. It's about building systems that make life better—for people and for the planet—not just doing less harm. read the full interview here: https://lnkd.in/dHBpwfXX

136

9 Kommentarer