That sound you hear is of corporations HUSTLING to put in place their #CarbonAccounting and #ClimateRisk departments.
The SEC is not far behind California.
I look forward to seeing those rankings. A "carbon fact" on product labels would be nice, like "nutrition facts" on food labels.
It's "The new dawn of a corporate climate disclosure regime with legal teeth."
"By 2026, those companies will have to publicly disclose how much #carbon is produced by their operations and electricity use. Critically, by 2027, they will also be required to report #emissions generated by their #SupplyChains and customers, known as “#Scope3” emissions, which are highly controversial among business interests, including the #FossilFuel industry."
"Starting as soon as January, major #US companies that raise money on European stock exchanges will start compiling information on their #CarbonEmissions, #ClimateRisks and strategies to counter the damage.
The #SEC proposed a #ClimateDisclosure rule last year, but the agency is trying to deal with pushback from Republican lawmakers and industry groups."
More than 50,000 companies to report climate impact in EU from 2024.
Rightwing attempt to block the adoption of new sustainability rules is voted down.
"The #EU has set itself apart from markets such as the US by demanding that companies report on the impact of #ClimateChange and sustainability issues on their business and the impact their operations have on the environment — a concept known as “#DoubleMateriality”."
"Markus Müller, #DeutscheBank's ESG Chief Investment Officer, has recently issued a warning to investors about the looming risk of sudden devaluation due to #ClimateChange. "
The implementation of #ClimateRisk disclosure rules in regions such as the #EuropeanUnion and #California has made potential losses increasingly apparent to investors."
"Walking back the Scope 3 requirement would represent a win for those in the corporate world that lobbied against the changes and would deviate from European Union rules which would make Scope 3 disclosures mandatory for large companies starting in 2024."
"The most controversial part of the SEC’s agenda is a March 2022 proposal that would force businesses — in registration statements, annual reports or other documents — to detail risks that a warming planet poses to their operations. Under the plan, some large companies would also have to disclose emissions that come from other firms in their supply chain."
"In the last 21 months, agency staff, commissioners’ offices, climate activists and powerful trade associations have met dozens of times on the rule, with no clear resolution.
As the #SEC proposals have lingered, other authorities have plowed ahead on #ClimateDisclosure rules. Thousands of U.S. companies will fall under robust California mandates enacted this year and European Union regulations that went into effect in January."
"The #SEC has dropped a requirement for U.S.-listed companies to disclose so-called Scope 3 #emissions, which was included in its original draft of the rules published in March 2022, the sources said."
@CelloMomOnCars Yep, anyone who does business in with the EU, or California, or a bunch of other countries, is going to have to report scope 3 anyway. I think it makes sense if this does make the cut down rule get on the books, and hope they don’t gut it further on the way.
"If adopted, the new draft would represent a win for many corporations and their trade groups that lobbied to water down the rules. But it would also deviate from European Union rules which make Scope 3 disclosures mandatory for large companies starting this year and potentially complicate compliance for some global corporations."
"The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has weakened a proposed climate disclosure rule after strong pushback from companies, and will no longer require companies to report [Scope 3] greenhouse gas emissions.
Under the final rule, companies only have to report [Scope 1 and Scope 2] emissions if they believe they are material to investors — [this] ultimately allows companies to decide whether they need to disclose emissions-related information."
Of the manoeuverings of the fossil fuel industry to weaken and further fight the SEC rule.
" It’s very unlikely, though, that companies will be able to escape disclosure requirements now in place in the European Union, California, and other jurisdictions. For now, as ever, the fossil fuel industry and the politicians it donates to will keep trying to deny the inevitable."
"The #SEC rule is just one data point in a global picture that is trending toward climate disclosure. Countries from the United Kingdom to Singapore are pursuing their own regimes. And the European Union’s climate disclosure regulations will be particularly relevant for many U.S. companies. They are also far more stringent than the SEC’s. And then there’s California. The state is pursuing its own disclosure regime, which other states could soon replicate."
The SEC's #climate disclosure rule is now stuck while fossil fuel companies are taking it to court.
You can fear "regulatory arbitrage" - where companies flee Europe for the laxer rules in the US - but not doing business in the European market seems like a big loss.
And inside the US itself, California has started to require climate disclosure from the largest companies doing business in the state.
"Investors will be asking companies for data on indirect greenhouse gas emissions that new U.S. financial disclosure rules exclude, the International Sustainability Standards Board's (ISSB) chair told Reuters.
"Investors say #Scope3 is important," ISSB Chair Emmanuel Faber said in an interview."
You can hide behind the #SEC but if you need to disclose your emissions to someone you've effectively disclosed to everyone.
"Republican-led states, energy industry companies and business groups say the rules amount to environmental regulation and therefore overstep the #SEC's legal mandate.
On the other side, environmental groups including the Sierra Club and Natural Resources Defense Council have said the rules do not go far enough. A more stringent initial draft was diluted."
Add comment