Уменьшение влияния парникового эффекта становится всё более и более выгодным для различных компаний. Это можно понять по исследованию McKinsey, в котором анализируется ситуация с выбросами. 4500 компаний показали публично свои стратегические планы, 40% из которых включают сокращение выбросов в связи с вероятными государственными запретами в будущем, а также c тем, что всё больше покупателей предпочитают экологически чисто произведённую продукцию. Какие ещё результаты дало исследование — об этом читайте в отчёте McKinsey
The argument for global companies to reduce their greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions is clearer than it has ever been:
- Business operations around the world are now subject to greater climate and transition risks.
- Consumers are clamoring for eco-friendly products and responsible corporate behaviors.
- Investors are increasingly embracing capital-allocation strategies that take environmental, social, and governance (ESG) issues into account.
- Policy makers and government organizations are exploring the potential regulation of carbon emissions.
In response, organizations across all industries have declared GHG-emission-reduction targets—including for some a “net-zero commitment,” in which a company ensures that emissions from its value-chain activities create no net climate impact.
In 2020, more than 4,500 companies worldwide self-reported their GHG emissions for public disclosure, and about 40 percent of those companies have committed to specific emissions targets as part of their strategic and financial plans.1
What about the companies that haven’t—what sort of goals should they set? To find out, we reviewed the 2020 data on disclosing companies’ carbon-emissions targets. We wanted to see which companies and industries seem to be on track to meet their goals and how they got there.2 Among our observations: the more aggressive the targets, the better the results.
Time and scope are critical factors
Our analysis shows that 44 percent of the organizations that are currently disclosing their GHG emissions are focused on short-term targets—that is, they are aiming for emissions reductions by 2025. Twenty-seven percent of the disclosing companies are focused on medium-term targets (with reductions by 2026 to 2040), while 2 percent are focused on long-term goals (with reductions by 2031 to 2050 or later). The remaining 27 percent of organizations have set targets across all three time horizons.
Most of the disclosed targets (74 percent) are from companies trying to reduce GHG emissions that are closer to the core—that is, from sources they own or control (Scope 1 emissions) and from the generation of the electricity, heat, or steam that they purchase (Scope 2).3 By contrast, only 26 percent of the targets are aimed at reducing Scope 3 emissions, which are not directly owned by the business but are related to its activities—in air cargo or supply chain, for instance (Exhibit 1). That is likely because Scope 3 emissions are much more challenging for companies to track and control. However, in our experience, it is worth the effort to do so: Scope 3 emissions can account for more than 50 percent of a company’s total GHG emissions.