Share this comment
If every company reported their own scope 1 and 2 emissions, credible labeling might be possible. I, too, have been trying to tackle the scope 3 emissions challenge. See my own post here for the “and” I think is needed from oil and gas companies: stewardingenergy.com/20…
Would be interested in hearing comments.
If every company reported their own scope 1 and 2 emissions, credible labeling might be possible. I, too, have been trying to tackle the scope 3 emissions challenge. See my own post here for the “and” I think is needed from oil and gas companies: https://stewardingenergy.com/2024/06/24/energy-shift-the-and-needed-from-og-companies/
Would be interested in hearing comments.
I agree with you that it's not O&G companies that are totally to blame. For me, this seems like a form of scapegoating that rich consumers use to shift the responsibility away from themselves.
Another solution to scope 3 emissions could be mandatory offsetting for the carbon emissions, upfront--for every ton of carbon produced by O&G, they have to pay to take a ton out. You could do this on the free market, so it would create jobs and innovation. And, because many new businesses would be formed around carbon sequestration techniques, innovation would go up and costs of offsetting would go down. The O&G companies would pass on the cost of the offsets to the consumer, so the higher prices would also lower consumption. Eventually, if clean energy is viable, it would become cheaper than O&G. This would need to be done globally. Right now, this isn't possible, but perhaps in the future...
Interesting concept. This would be embedding a carbon tax-equivalent for scope 3 into the production cost. Hard to implement in a global economy though. Certification schemes such as for paper from sustainably managed forests are also being tried (Equitable Origin) for natural gas with limited success. It remains a tough nut to crack!