The Greenhouse Gas Protocol (GHGP), a non-profit organization that sets standards for carbon accounting, is at the center of a heated debate over how tech giants should account for their emissions. The GHGP has announced plans to revise its Scope 2 accounting standards, which cover indirect emissions from purchased electricity and steam, heat, or cooling.
The move has been welcomed by Google and Microsoft, which have advocated for an hourly accounting method that matches every hour of electricity use with new, carbon-free power. However, other companies, including Amazon, Meta, and Salesforce, have pushed for a different approach known as "emissions first," which aims to maximize annual emission cuts by swapping renewable energy certificates.
The debate has spilled into the real world, with the GHGP-sponsored working group on Scope 2 accounting standards facing criticism from some stakeholders. A rival carbon-accounting coalition, Carbon Measures, has been launched by major Fortune 500 companies, including Exxon Mobil and Air Liquide.
The GHGP's financial situation is also under pressure, with sources claiming that the organization is in a "financial bind" and depends on philanthropic and corporate money to run. The organization is forging a new partnership with the International Organization for Standardization to harmonize its standards with those of ISO.
As the debate continues, it remains to be seen how the GHGP's revised Scope 2 accounting standards will shape the future of carbon accounting in the tech industry.
The move has been welcomed by Google and Microsoft, which have advocated for an hourly accounting method that matches every hour of electricity use with new, carbon-free power. However, other companies, including Amazon, Meta, and Salesforce, have pushed for a different approach known as "emissions first," which aims to maximize annual emission cuts by swapping renewable energy certificates.
The debate has spilled into the real world, with the GHGP-sponsored working group on Scope 2 accounting standards facing criticism from some stakeholders. A rival carbon-accounting coalition, Carbon Measures, has been launched by major Fortune 500 companies, including Exxon Mobil and Air Liquide.
The GHGP's financial situation is also under pressure, with sources claiming that the organization is in a "financial bind" and depends on philanthropic and corporate money to run. The organization is forging a new partnership with the International Organization for Standardization to harmonize its standards with those of ISO.
As the debate continues, it remains to be seen how the GHGP's revised Scope 2 accounting standards will shape the future of carbon accounting in the tech industry.
. They're trying to make things more accurate and transparent with their new scope 2 accounting standards, but it sounds like it's causing some drama among the big companies. I get why Google and Microsoft would want that hourly accounting method - it seems like a pretty straightforward way to measure emissions. But at the same time, I can see how Amazon and Meta might be pushing for something different if they think it'll really make a bigger impact in the long run 
.
. Maybe this partnership with ISO will help them get back on their feet? I'm curious to see how this whole thing plays out - it's like they're trying to find a balance between being practical and making a real difference 
... as a student who's trying to save the planet through reducing our school's carbon footprint, it's wild to see how much power these big companies have over our future. I mean, shouldn't they be setting an example for us young folks? Like, can't we just get some straightforward guidelines on how to make our emissions count?
... it makes sense, right? But at the same time, I don't wanna see the GHGP's financial situation getting all wonky 
. We need organizations like this to drive change, not just go under because they can't get their act together.
... and hopefully our school will take some of these new standards and run with them 
. Meanwhile, Amazon and others are pushing for something simpler, but is it really gonna cut more emissions? 
Not sure about the new partnership with ISO either... hope they can get their financials in order 
. Anyway, think we're just scratching the surface of how tech giants should account for their emissions 
.
It's not that hard, right? I mean, Google and Microsoft are all for hourly accounting, but Amazon and Meta want to game the system by swapping certificates... it's just so extra 
. Ugh, this debate is exhausting 
it makes total sense, you know? every hour counts and we gotta be more precise with our emissions tracking 
I don't get why they wanna stick with the old "emissions first" approach 
that's like, so last season 
the GHGP is literally on the verge of financial meltdown 
On the other hand, I'm all for giving the GHGP some financial breathing room - they've been doing amazing work in this field and need some extra support. But at the same time, maybe they should be pushing for more transparency and accountability from big companies like Exxon Mobil 
.
. And I'm loving the enthusiasm of the GHGP working group, even if they do face some criticism 
. It's like, we gotta keep pushing for innovation and progress in this space! Can't wait to see what happens next with these revised standards 
.
. The tech giants are right to push for an hourly accounting method - it's the only way to get real-time visibility into their emissions 
. Let's see if GHGP can step up its game and lead by example 
.
I mean, can't they just focus on making the rules better? Instead, it seems like everyone's trying to one-up each other with their fancy ideas 
. It's like they're all competing in some kind of carbon accounting Olympics 
.
. They need to sort that out and focus on what they do best: setting standards for good carbon accounting practices 
.
.
.
Carbon Measures has some big names behind them, so that's gotta be taken into consideration. I'm keeping an eye on this one, will be interesting to see how it shakes out!
. And poor GHGP, stuck in the middle 