Month: March 2023

Key Learnings from the 2023 GreenBiz Conference

At the start of each year, the annual GreenBiz conference serves as an opportunity to set resolutions for the environmental work we plan to do in the year ahead. Some of the brightest minds from all sectors (including many students and young climate professionals) gather at GreenBiz to stand behind this effort and in doing so, share discoveries, developments and trends related to climate. 

Karlina Wu and Elizabeth Geller, members of 3Degrees’ Energy and Climate Practice team, at GreenBiz.

My colleagues and I from 3Degrees enjoyed meeting sustainability leaders from all over the country and were encouraged to see a diverse range of speakers representing different genders, ages, as well as ethnic and racial backgrounds at the conference. Hearing from a diverse range of voices on topics that impact how we mitigate climate change, including climate justice, is a critical step in aligning the overarching corporate community to keep global warming below the 1.5 degree Celsius target. Overall, the conference felt like an opportunity to build momentum that I hope to carry throughout the year. In this blog, I will share my top takeaways from the conference that touch on:

  • Supplier engagement strategies
  • Disclosure vs. action considerations 
  • Climate tech software opportunities

Carrots Fare Better Than Sticks in Supplier Engagement

When it comes to addressing scope 3 value chain emissions, collecting supplier-specific emissions data is preferred. This primary data provides the right amount of granularity and is typically the most accurate. To gather the necessary information from suppliers, an effective supplier engagement plan is essential to the overall emissions reduction strategy. At GreenBiz, we noted a cross-industry trend that engaging with suppliers using incentives has been yielding the best results.  

Negative repercussions for non-performance can lead to a feeling of ‘compliance fatigue’, a term I heard a few times at GreenBiz referring to laggard behavior that arises when the compliance stick is applied too much. Most organizations are taking the positive reinforcement or ‘carrot approach’ by extending rewards for encouraged actions. For example, public recognition for suppliers that set actionable climate goals or offering expertise and support to suppliers who are beyond the curve. 

Members from the sustainability teams of a major American clothing brand and a multinational fast food chain shared that incentives tend to be more successful for supplier action. The teams use preferential rates and favorable financing to reward their suppliers that demonstrate performance on sustainability metrics and to encourage continued exceptional behavior. We also learned about a new incentivization tactic at GreenBiz — the use of credit. For instance, a building materials company partners with its bank to provide loans to customers that purchase low-carbon cement. 

We also heard multiple anecdotal testimonies from suppliers, a construction equipment provider and a third-party warehouser, who are planning to offer lower carbon products / services to their entire customer base after a key customer provided a long-term commitment to justify their initial investment. Regardless of the perk, receiving extra credit for going beyond the minimal requirement encourages deeper emissions reductions work. 

 

Nearly 200 attendees packed into the room for the 3Degrees-hosted workshop titled “Bringing Scope 3 Emissions into Focus.”

 

Tension Between Action and Disclosure

While many of the GreenBiz sessions focused on emission reduction action, particularly within scope 3, few speakers could get through their sessions without mentioning the proposed U.S. Securities and Exchange Commissions (SEC) rule that could require publicly-listed companies to disclose their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. As it stands, the proposed SEC rule would require disclosure of scope 1 and 2 emissions, as well as scope 3 emissions if they are material to the organization or if the organization has a target covering scope 3 emissions. Many speakers and attendees acknowledged the SEC’s proposed ruling as a positive move towards industry transparency and accountability, but at the same time, it creates a strain on sustainability teams’ resources who are balancing both disclosure and emission reduction action. 

Multiple corporate organizations revealed that they already spend six months of every year on emissions accounting and disclosure. This left us to wonder if the time spent on accounting and disclosure is detracting from the time spent taking action to reduce emissions and if there should be more acceptance for ‘messy-yet-quantifiable’ data to start with.

For now, the answer to the later half of that question seems to be yes. During our scope 3 discussion panel, there was resounding recognition that scope 3 emissions accounting is a “high level directional guesstimate” intended to direct reporting organizations towards their most impactful emission reduction areas. The answer to the former part of our question depends on the organization, and it is clearly being tackled by a number of climate tech companies aiming to reduce time spent on emissions accounting and disclosure through streamlined software tools.

 

The half-day interactive workshop was a deep dive on the use of climate tech for scope 3 accounting and reduction.

 

Taking Advantage of Climate Tech Platforms

In her half-day scope 3 roundtable session, my colleague Karlina Wu discussed how organizations are leveraging climate tech software for streamlined emissions accounting and disclosure. Climate technology is becoming increasingly prevalent as the need for credible data intensifies, driven not only by the proposed SEC ruling but also pressure from investors, customers, and other stakeholders. These platforms offer GHG emissions accounting, tracking, reporting and analytics functionality, supplier data gathering, risk identification, and enterprise ESG compliance. In addition to their streamlined nature, the auditability of data is another key reason why organizations consider software solutions. 

At GreenBiz, we heard from numerous organizations that they are interested in these software tools but don’t know where to start. Many factors play into selecting technology for climate work, all related to the existing GHG inventory process. Organizations should consider the sources of data already being collected, the type of disclosure required to date, the climate goals that have been set, and their current supplier engagement strategy. For more insight into selecting and implementing climate tech, get in touch

Looking ahead: the 2023 global carbon markets

The voluntary market (VCM) experienced heightened volatility in 2022, with an early, rapid price surge and plateau, followed by periods of recalibration. Despite this, there were numerous indications of healthy market growth, including the development of highly anticipated preliminary guidance on carbon credit quality and claims, increased focus on transparency and liquidity, and potential convergence of compliance markets with the voluntary market. 

In this blog post, we will explore some of these market trends and discuss how the market developments in 2022 may have a lasting impact in 2023 and in years to come.

Initiatives to Support Market Growth 

Both the growing interest and heightened criticism levied against carbon credits stem from the influx of organizations seeking to take action on climate change outside of their value chain. Since the inception of the VCM, standard bodies and registries have governed market interactions and have sought to improve credit quality. Efforts to codify a common framework for evaluating quality have only accelerated in the last year. Organizations such as the Voluntary Carbon Markets Integrity Initiative (VCMI), The Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market (IC-VCM) and the Science Based Targets Initiative (SBTi) are all working in parallel to provide clarity and guidance for both supply and demand-side market participants.

In Q3 of 2022, the IC-VCM released a draft of their Core Carbon Principles (CCPs), which aim to establish a global standard threshold for “high-quality” carbon credits and ensure consistency across the market. This initiative will evaluate carbon-crediting programs and methodologies against the CCPs, and will ultimately work with registries to label specific projects that are deemed “CCP-eligible”. The final version of the IC-VCM’s guidance is expected to be released later this year. Beyond developing a standardized framework, the IC-VCM could help bolster market credibility and facilitate investment in early-stage climate mitigation activities that are critical to achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement, including new carbon removal projects and other emerging technologies. Considerable feedback has been provided during the public consultation period, and it remains unclear what the finalized framework will include and how these standards will be adopted across the market.

The VCMI is also expected to release its own framework later this year. The goal of this initiative is to strengthen corporate guidance for making credible claims about the use of carbon credits on the pathway to net zero. Similarly, SBTi is expected to publish its recommendations on credible beyond value chain mitigation (BVCM). We anticipate that this guidance will encourage companies to maximize their climate impact and make transparent claims about their carbon credit purchases.

While the VCM is confronting some of these challenges, market participants are taking steps to improve transparency and liquidity through the increased use of trading platforms, standardized products, and project ratings. In the meantime, standard bodies and industry initiatives will be expected to answer pressing questions around how to improve project quality and incentivize the adoption of credible carbon credit claims. Whether leading governing bodies will align on their recommendations and how the market will respond to this new guidance remains to be seen.  

Compliance and Voluntary Market Overlap

According to a recent BloombergNEF article, global compliance markets cover approximately 20% of global greenhouse gas emissions and reached a value of more than $850 billion in 2021. The need for VCM regulation is increasing alongside the development and expansion of global compliance market frameworks. Many market participants are speculating that the distinction between voluntary and compliance markets is becoming increasingly blurred and more markets could soon be overlapping.

The 2015 Paris Agreement further blurs the distinction between compliance and voluntary carbon markets. Article 6 of the Agreement, which was discussed at length at the last two COP summits, establishes an international carbon market and allows countries to trade carbon reductions and removals to achieve country-level GHG reduction targets. Article 6 also establishes an accounting mechanism known as “corresponding adjustments” to ensure only one country is counting the emission reduction toward its NDC, or Nationally Determined Contribution. Countries and airlines are expected to use credits with corresponding adjustments for compliance purposes, while questions still remain over how corresponding adjustments (or the lack thereof) will impact the kinds of carbon credit claims that can be made by companies. 

“The 2015 Paris Agreement further blurs the distinction between compliance and voluntary carbon markets. Article 6 of the Agreement, which was discussed at length at the last two COP summits, establishes an international carbon market and allows countries to trade carbon reductions and removals to achieve country-level GHG reduction targets.”

As we have outlined, there is much in flux this year in the VCM. The initiatives above all aim to provide confidence and consistency in the market to help scale demand for critical carbon mitigation tools that will be required to meet the challenge of limiting warming to 1.5C. As regulatory bodies and voluntary standards announce updates throughout the year, 3Degrees will continue to provide guidance to clients on emerging best practices around claims and carbon credit procurement. 

What you need to know as an EV charging host site

Key takeaways: 

  • There is an opportunity for businesses looking to host (host site) EV infrastructure as charging sites are not keeping pace with EV adoption.  
  • Utilization growth is a journey.  Users need to become aware of your site, amenities are competitive, and reliability is essential.  
  • Demand charges are a big risk, especially with the current distribution of charging.

2022 saw a dramatic increase in the sale of Electric Vehicles (EVs) with a 65% year-over-year growth rate, selling 800,000 EVs compared to 480,000 in 2021(1).  However, according to the Alternative Fuels Data Center (afdc.gov), the installations of Direct Current Fast Charger Stations (DCFC) only grew 11% year-over-year to 6,750 from 6,100.  In this article, we will explore collected data from 3Degrees’ partners and how charging host sites can utilize these findings to implement in their own operations.

EV charging networks are rapidly partnering with a variety of host companies to install new DCFC charging stations across the country.  These stations can range in power and supply from 50kW to 350kW each, and individual charging times depend on numerous factors, including the power of the charger, the size of the EV battery, and the charging curve of the specific vehicle.  According to our own data across sites in 4 states, with more than 10,000 charging sessions, the average charging time is approximately 30 minutes and delivers 20kWh.  

While the EV industry sales grow at a pace that exceeds expert analysts, the business case for an individual DCFC site is still very uncertain and heavily reliant on incentives. 

Key findings that host sites should be aware of:

  • Growth rates for site visits increased dramatically after installation, with a 130% year-over-year growth spike from when the units were first installed.
  • Afternoon peak demand charges, kW-denominated costs based on the highest 15-minute interval, are a real risk to the business case. 
  • Scarcity is not a choice.  Eventually, sites will have to compete for charging visits and users will prioritize a higher number of chargers, reliability, and amenities.   

A great example of a mutually beneficial relationship between an EV charger network and a site host is that of  ChargeNet & Taco Bell.  In California, EV fast-charging station developer, ChargeNet, is installing solar, battery storage, and DCFC in many Taco Bell locations. The partnership supports both businesses, with ChargeNet benefiting from the installation of their DCFCs at an established brand with amenities such as food, restrooms, and a continuous stream of potential clientele, while TacoBell benefits by using the DCFC to draw EV customers that could convert to a sale.  According to our data, each charging site draws approximately 100 customers a month, however, it is unknown how many of those are supplemental customers. 

As illustrated above, peak charging times are typically between the hours of 12-6 PM, which is when electricity is expensive due to evening energy peaks. Demand charges are base fees an energy user pays for their highest 15-minute kW usage.  Host sites should expect to encounter the highest demand charges and work to incentivize charging off-peak to increase overall utilization. (2)  

Still, the biggest driver of charging is, quite obviously, the need to charge. Local charging demand will occur outside of travel corridors as EV adoption among drivers without access to home charging increases.  In these markets, time is less of a priority if the visits coincide with regular activities like work, shopping, or a quick lunch.  These charging stations are going to be the bedrock of an EV community, and since the average shopper spends between 60-70 hours a year at supermarkets(3), we see this as a huge business opportunity for this segment.  Great examples of existing DCFC at retail locations include Fred Meyers’ fueling stations in Oregon or 7-11’s 7Charge network in California, Colorado, Florida, and Texas.  These sites could be a natural location for weekly charging at slower speeds (50kW) and take market share away from home charging if the service is priced reasonably.

In conclusion, hosts who are considering adding  DCFC to their location should be aware that this business opportunity exists, but also understand that while utilization is currently growing, there are still several risks to consider prior to exploring any implementation.

Three questions to ask are: 

  1. Do I have a good site for EV charging? 
  2. How do I want to participate in this business?
  3. What incentives exist to de-risk this opportunity? 

While our data is not yet conclusive, the excitement around the opening of Tesla’s proprietary Supercharger network suggests that there is a first-mover advantage.  We speculate that sites that enter a market or region first will have significantly higher ramp rates, retain clientele, and effectively become the default choice compared to chargers that enter the market later.

How we help

Think you’ve got a good site for an EV charging network?  3Degrees can help! We understand that taking the first steps into EV charging can seem overwhelming, which is why we are proud to partner with EV networks and site hosts nationwide to help alleviate some of the complications. Working closely with our team of transportation and energy experts, we will help you understand the potential value, evaluate potential charging requirements and state and Federal incentives, and determine future next steps.

Contact us today to speak to learn more about getting started as an EV charging site host.

References:

  1. https://www.coxautoinc.com/market-insights/in-a-down-market-ev-sales-soar-to-new-record/
  2. https://www.sdge.com/businesses/pricing-plans/understanding-demand
  3. https://www.driveresearch.com/market-research-company-blog/grocery-store-statistics-where-when-how-much-people-grocery-shop/

Webinar Recording: Understanding the Carbon Removals Landscape

Recorded March 2nd, 2023

The lasting mitigation of carbon is critical for keeping emissions within the temperature goals set in the Paris Agreement. Backed by the IPCC, Science Based Target Initiative, and the United Nations’ Race to Zero Campaign, carbon removals pose a huge opportunity to meet the crucial 1.5 degrees or less global warming trajectory. These initiatives mandate corporations’ use of carbon removal to address remaining emissions in their climate target year and to contribute to global decarbonization on their path to net zero.

For the voluntary carbon markets to meet the growing demand for carbon removals, rapid progress must be made to expand the supply. The carbon removal market is nascent and many unanswered questions exist around project-level criteria, methodologies, and scalability. New innovative pathways for removing and storing carbon are constantly emerging, and standards bodies are still shaping methodologies for these projects.

With so little concrete guidance, how can organizations help build a prosperous carbon removals market that will meet the demands of a net zero economy? In this webinar, we will start to answer that question.

In this webinar you will learn more about:

  • The current carbon removals market
  • Possible carbon removal procurement pathways
  • Key considerations and screening criteria for corporate carbon removal buyers
  • Actions that scale up the supply for carbon removals

Watch the webinar

Moderator:

Speakers:

  • Steph Harris, Director, Carbon Markets, 3Degrees
  • Maggie Lund, Policy Manager, Carbon Markets, 3Degrees

Bioenergy Devco – Renewable Natural Gas

BioenergyDevco Renewable Natural Gas Project

 

Project type: Anaerobic Digestion 

Carbon intensity: -16 gCO2e/MJ

Tracking System: M-RETS Renewable
Thermal

Anaerobic digestion facility utilizes organic waste to generate clean energy

Bioenergy Devco’s Maryland Food Center Campus is revolutionizing the end use of waste. The first of its scale, the Jessup Bioenergy Center is able to recycle about 110,000 tons of organic matter through the process of anaerobic digestion each year, generating 312,000 MMBtu of renewable natural gas (RNG) that is injected into the common carrier pipeline network — enough to power over 7,600 homes annually. Truck loads of feedstock are collected and inspected, before being delivered to a pre-tank before its final destination: a completely enclosed digester where it’s broken down by microbes. The inputs can range drastically from protein processor misuse, litter and industrial food facility sludge, to fats, oils, greases and excess post-consumer organics and packaged food. 

As the microbes do their work, they create biogas which rises to the top of the container, then pumped from the tank, filtered and scrubbed for impurities. From there, the pipeline-quality RNG is injected into the pipeline network. RNG is not only a renewable substitute for fossil natural gas, but, in many cases, also avoids potent methane emissions from being vented into the atmosphere. The Maryland Food Center Campus anaerobically digests food waste that otherwise would have been sent to a landfill and vented methane into the atmosphere. Third-party assessments of the lifecycle carbon emissions of the renewable natural gas generated by the Jessup facility therefore credit the facility for avoiding methane emissions, resulting in a negative carbon intensity of -16 gCO22/MJ. The system came online in 2022. 


 

Project type: Anaerobic Digestion 

Carbon intensity: -16 gCO2e/MJ

Tracking System: M-RETS Renewable
Thermal

Bioenergy Devco’s Maryland Food Center Campus is revolutionizing the end use of waste. The first of its scale, the Jessup Bioenergy Center is able to recycle about 110,000 tons of organic matter through the process of anaerobic digestion each year, generating 312,000 MMBtu of renewable natural gas (RNG) that is injected into the common carrier pipeline network — enough to power over 7,600 homes annually. Truck loads of feedstock are collected and inspected, before being delivered to a pre-tank before its final destination: a completely enclosed digester where it’s broken down by microbes. The inputs can range drastically from protein processor misuse, litter and industrial food facility sludge, to fats, oils, greases and excess post-consumer organics and packaged food. 

As the microbes do their work, they create biogas which rises to the top of the container, then pumped from the tank, filtered and scrubbed for impurities. From there, the pipeline-quality RNG is injected into the pipeline network. RNG is not only a renewable substitute for fossil natural gas, but, in many cases, also avoids potent methane emissions from being vented into the atmosphere. The Maryland Food Center Campus anaerobically digests food waste that otherwise would have been sent to a landfill and vented methane into the atmosphere. Third-party assessments of the lifecycle carbon emissions of the renewable natural gas generated by the Jessup facility therefore credit the facility for avoiding methane emissions, resulting in a negative carbon intensity of -16 gCO22/MJ. The system came online in 2022. 


 

To learn more about the Bioenergy Devco anaerobic digestion project and how your organization can support this initiative and address its GHG emissions with renewable natural gas (RNG) certificates, Get in Touch.

Photos courtesy of Bioenergy Devco

Image 1 of 6