Counting Carbon With WorldOra, Episode 1
Updated: Sep 20
The passage of these bills in CA this week have made it important to get the word out to the public, both private and business sectors.
There are many ways that everyone, from the small residential homeowner to the corporate CEO, are eventually going to be experiencing these changes during the energy transition taking place.
Right now the CA laws only take effect with billion dollar businesses reporting their carbon footprint and half a billion dollar businesses disclosing their financial risk due to climate change.
The bill defines Scope 1 emissions as all direct emissions that come from sources that the reporting company “owns or directly controls, regardless of location, including, but not limited to, fuel combustion activities.” (This includes properties that are owned by the company that they make decisions on electrical upgrades etc; - Terri)
Scope 2 refers to indirect emissions from consumed electricity, heating or cooling, while Scope 3 applies to those from sources that the company neither owns nor controls, such as purchased goods, business travel, employee commutes and use of sold products. (Picture all those companies pressuring employees to come back to the office this year. Would they be doing so if the employee’s commute counts against the company’s carbon footprint?! - Terri)
We will get into defining scope 3 later since it is much more complex.
Go to our website for more information to help you understand how this will eventually effect businesses and I believe residences as we all work to correct the outcome of excess greenhouse gas emissions during the industrial age.
Sources: California passed a first-of-its-kind bill mandating pollution … / It could become the first law in the US to force companies to publicly report their greenhouse gas emissions, and more mandated disclosures could be on the way.
Nation-leading climate disclosure bill passes Assembly A sweeping bill that would have national implications for the climate information that corporations need to disclose passed the California Assembly on Monday, putting the landmark legislation on track to reach Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk.
What happened: Sen. Scott Wiener’s (D-San Francisco) CA SB253 (23R) cleared the Assembly by a 41-20 vote after passing the full Senate earlier this year. Wiener took amendments last week to win over businesses and moderate Democrats after last year's attempt failed by one vote on the Assembly floor.
Previous stories on this covered by us:
Climate action in California has repercussions around the globe; the state has the fifth-largest economy in the world, and is forecast to become the fourth sometime this year. That’s why all eyes are on the Climate Accountability Package that was introduced in the California Senate in January and is now under consideration in the State Assembly.
Three separate bills are bundled into the Climate Accountability Package, though they share common goals: improving corporate transparency and standardizing corporate disclosures regarding carbon emissions; aligning public investments with climate goals; and raising the bar on corporate action to address the climate crisis. If these bills pass, they would compel thousands of companies doing business in California to disclose their scope 1, 2, and 3 greenhouse gas emissions and/or climate-related financial risk information. Some of these reports would be due as soon as December 2024.
Though these bills focus on companies that do business in the state, they are part of a global movement towards legislation that requires robust climate reporting from companies, including the SEC’s proposed climate disclosure rule in the US, and the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive in Europe.
Of the three California Climate bills, SB 252, applies only to two California state pension funds, so for the purposes of this article, we focused on the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act (SB 253) and the Climate-Related Financial Risk Act (SB 261).
second bill- CA SB261
Federal Securities and Exchange Commission is considering similar disclosure rules