Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The document is an open letter from energy systems researchers supporting the modernization of the GHGP scope 2 market-based method (MBM). The authors argue that the current MBM allows companies to claim zero emissions without a physical relationship between generation and demand, thereby failing as a legitimate value chain inventory and providing minimal real-world emissions impact. They advocate for the adoption of hourly matching, deliverability, and incrementality criteria to steer procurement toward new clean energy projects and technologies like energy storage and clean firm generation. While supporting the proposed updates, the signatories suggest strengthening them with an explicit age-based incrementality requirement to close gaps where legacy clean generators operate as merchant participants.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • The current scope 2 market-based method (MBM) is not a legitimate value chain emissions inventory because it permits clean electricity claims without a credible physical link between the generation of power and the demand for it.
  • Existing MBM rules incentivize procurement that has little effect on actual emissions, as companies can achieve zero scope 2 emissions using attributes from existing generators or those mandated by governments.
  • To maximize real-world emissions reductions, market-based scope 2 accounting should incorporate three specific criteria: hourly matching, deliverability, and incrementality (a new-build requirement).
  • The proposed MBM updates are seen as a strength because they make achieving zero scope 2 emissions more difficult, which increases the credibility of corporate reports and may motivate companies to pursue additional decarbonization strategies.

Cite the original document

APA
Clean Air Task Force (2026). ghgp_open_letter_final-b6b0388b304e6894.pdf. https://cdn.catf.us/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/22110738/GHGP_Open_Letter_Final.pdf
Chicago
Clean Air Task Force. ghgp_open_letter_final-b6b0388b304e6894.pdf. 2026. https://cdn.catf.us/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/22110738/GHGP_Open_Letter_Final.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite press release |author=Clean Air Task Force |title=ghgp_open_letter_final-b6b0388b304e6894.pdf |date=18 June 2026 |url=https://cdn.catf.us/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/22110738/GHGP_Open_Letter_Final.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@misc{cleanairtaskforce2026ghgpopenletterfinalb6b0388b304e6894pdf, author = {{Clean Air Task Force}}, title = {{ghgp\_open\_letter\_final-b6b0388b304e6894.pdf}}, publisher = {Clean Air Task Force}, year = {2026}, month = jun, url = {https://cdn.catf.us/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/22110738/GHGP_Open_Letter_Final.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated