Tom Raftery

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 comentarios

3 charts showing the growing price premium for high-quality NBS carbon credits. 1. $10/ton growth in 2025 for highly-rated ARR credits Average prices for afforestation and reforestation (ARR) credits rated BBB or above by Sylvera rose to $24/ton in September. That's up $10 since January of this year. 2. >40% premium for highly-rated NBS credits across project types Calyx Global data shows a very large price premium for nature-based carbon credits in its Tier 1 category (A-rating or above on the Calyx scale). Calyx/Clear Blue Markets pricing data for Tier 1 NBS projects began in May, 2024 and showed about a 40% premium over Tier 2 credits at that time. The chart shows this Tier 1 premium rising steadily since then, to about ~150% as of July of this year. This data is across all nature-based project types rated by Calyx, so includes both removals and reduction/avoidance projects. 3. AlliedOffsets The third chart, this one by AlliedOffsets, shows a very large spread between maximum estimated retired price for NBS credits vs weighted average, since Jan 2024. Though the chart isn't mapping this against a measure of project quality, it underscores the story in the previous two charts - that a few projects are selling for substantial premiums above average market prices. One takeaway: It's impressive to see the correlation between high ratings and price premiums. To me, it's unclear whether the ratings are causing the price premiums, or just reflecting what's happening (probably a little bit of both?). Either way, it underscores the big responsibility on ratings agencies to get it right !

107

7 comentarios

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 comentarios

#Article6 / #CORSIA buy side insights and tips shared in the Sylvera and Climate Action Center of Excellence (CACE) webinar yesterday. 1. Key aspects when considering an Article 6 investment.   Start with the NDC - how clearly defined are the NDC targets? Are the targets conditional or unconditional. Is there a clear sectoral breakdown? Is the country serious about meeting its target and has it had sufficient climate finance?   At a minimum you need to check that your project type isn’t sat in an unconditional NDC, ideally it’s in the conditional NDC and on a whitelist.    Look for an Article 6 Framework, is there a clear understanding of the costs of a Corresponding Adjustment? Who has legal authority to issue a CA? Is there alignment between the framework, regulations, and the NDC? Did the country submit it's last Biannual Transparency Report on time, and does it have the capacity to meet future reporting obligations? Smart investors are in country capacity building as well as investing at a project level. If the project does have an LOA, look for or ask when the Initial Report is being published. The UNFCCC Technical Expert Review team will then identify and publish any inconsistencies on the Centralised Accounting and Reporting Platform (CARP). What do those inconsistencies mean to corporate buyers?    If I was investing, I would look for projects that are CORSIA eligible, that can deliver real reductions or removals within the current NDC cycle, and whose economics will continue to stack up in the absence of a CA beyond 2030.  2. Role for collaboration. The A6 market is in reality, many markets with a CA in common. Most A6 credits only have one use case that needs to be designed for upfront, this fragments the market. Due to different buyer criteria, A6 credits tend to work for only one country or CORSIA, they can't deliver into both. This creates a real headache for project developers and countries. They effectively need to pick a winning horse before it’s born.   To scale, we need a greater fungibility of A6 credits. This requires buyers -countries, corporates or schemes - to align in their criteria.    Country stakeholders could also form consortiums to share the cost of capacity building - and by that I don’t mean workshops, but support with reporting and compliance.  Some countries cant even afford to turn up to the negotiating table at Bonn/COP, so we need to make sure funding isn’t just for projects, but for the host countries to meet all the requirements to issue a robust CA and to deliver conditional NDCs. In an ideal world, if the promised conditional financing doesn’t materialise, a change in the rules to allow market mechanisms to fill the funding gap should be considered. For those that missed the webinar: https://lnkd.in/eAj2p5HV Francisco Rentería Alexandra Soezer Lisa Hendrickson Carbon Pulse Ing. Glenn Kwabena Gyimah (PhD) Carmen Álvarez Campo 🌿 Supanut Chotevitayatarakorn emsurge

107

13 comentarios

An interesting piece from CSO Futures last week highlights why the latest round of national climate pledges has left many experts underwhelmed. Thirteen countries submitted new targets ahead of #COP30, including China, the EU and Australia. Yet the combined effect only reduces emissions by around 2 gigatons by 2035. To stay on a 1.5°C pathway we need to cut more than 31 gigatons. On our current path the world is heading for around 2.8°C of warming, with the risks of heatwaves, floods and wildfires becoming more severe. At the same time, there are signs of progress: 77% of global GDP is now covered by net zero commitments, and corporate pledges are rising, with US firms representing $12 trillion in annual revenue. A reminder that while ambition is growing, the pace and scale of action must accelerate if we are to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement. Read more in the comments.

35

1 comentario

What’s the problem with carbon credit “offsets”? The voluntary carbon market has huge potential, but there are a couple key flaws with the term “offset”: 1. Scientific reality From a scientific perspective, you can’t “offset” emissions once they’re in the atmosphere. You can remove them later at a higher cost. But in the meantime, they're worsening temperatures, air pollution, ocean acidification, and more. 2. Profit margin trap Many heavy polluters have thin profit margins relative to the GHG they emit. When we tell O&G or cement companies to "offset" everything they can't eliminate, we push them toward the cheapest credits, which lowers market integrity overall. (Multiple papers point to a $100-$200 per tonne of CO2 as a valid estimate for the social cost of carbon.) For more on profit per GHG tonne as a metric, see Robert Höglund & Carbon Gap‘s great analysis in “who can pay for carbon removal?” - So, what’s a better framing? Climate contribution. This approach decouples 𝗰𝗮𝗿𝗯𝗼𝗻 𝗳𝗼𝗼𝘁𝗽𝗿𝗶𝗻𝘁 𝗿𝗲𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 from 𝗰𝗮𝗿𝗯𝗼𝗻 𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗱𝗶𝘁 𝗽𝘂𝗿𝗰𝗵𝗮𝘀𝗲𝘀. Companies focus on 𝗱𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝗱𝗲𝗰𝗮𝗿𝗯𝗼𝗻𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻, 𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝗱𝗲𝗰𝗮𝗿𝗯𝗼𝗻𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻, AND 𝗰𝗹𝗶𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗻𝗴. This way, companies are held responsible for reducing their footprint. At the same time, they’re held responsible for channeling finance to projects that avoid and remove CO2 via mechanisms like science-backed carbon credits. For more on this, see SWEEP’s & Mirova Research’s “Corporate Climate Contribution Index” initiative. - Whether we call it offsetting, climate contribution, or something else - here’s the key point: Corporates cannot only reduce emissions. We also need corporates funding high-integrity carbon projects - right now.

73

15 comentarios

What do European EV drivers *really* think? 🔌 That once you’ve experienced electric driving, it’s hard to go back! It's the key takeaway from Chargemap's survey released last week. 🇪🇺 Great news for Europe’s net-zero ambitions. ⚡ Good news for the power sector too: policymakers and investors are betting big on rising electricity demand, largely fueled by the switch to EVs. Key insights from Chargemap’s survey: 👉 9 out of 10 are satisfied or very satisfied with their electric driving experience 👉 83% have absolutely no plans to return to petrol, diesel or hybrid vehicle  👉 75% of EV drivers make at least one long trip in their EV each year This might also explain why EV sales are up 34% in Europe in H1 2025 vs H1 2024. All countries are seeing sales grow: 🇩🇪 +35% in Germany 🇬🇧 +32% in the UK 🇮🇹 +82% in Italy 🇪🇸 +84% in Spain (Yes, Italy and Spain are still smaller EV markets, but the growth trend is clear) All except France 🇫🇷 ...🤦‍♂️ (see my analysis in the comments - en français) -- Shoutout to our client Chargemap (Tiphanie Meyer) for collecting 20,000 survey responses. This might be the most comprehensive study on EV driver satisfaction to date. 👏 Mathéo GRILLET VERACY Aurelien de Meaux Ion Leahu-Aluas Matthieu Dischamps François Oudot - Bump Céline Winant-Pateron Sebastien Pinauldt Léo Larivière

41

4 comentarios