Trade groups question dependability of California environment reporting expense

A California expense that would need corporations to report their greenhouse gas emissions would not satisfy its mentioned objectives without agreed-upon approaches for computing those emissions, the American Bankers Association, the California Bankers Association and 5 monetary market associations stated in a current letter. The Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act was reestablished in the California State Senate in January after it was directly beat in 2015. It would need companies with yearly earnings of more than $1 billion to report their direct and indirect emissions to the state every year.

In the letter, the associations kept in mind that the expense not just needs companies to report emissions originating from their operations—called scope 1 and 2 emissions—however likewise scope 3 “value chain” emissions over which they have no direct control, such as the emissions produced when consumers utilize their items. They stated that no commonly accepted approaches exist for computing such emissions. The groups advised legislators to leave out scope 3 emissions from the legislation.

“While [the bill]proposes to limit the disclosure requirement to reporting entities with more than $1 billion in annual revenue, bank customers could find it costly and challenging to supply detailed and reliable value chain information to their lenders, especially without an accepted standardized calculation methodology,” the groups stated. “In addition to large corporations, information from consumers, small businesses, municipal entities and federal agencies will be needed. Without a standardized calculation methodology, reporting will depend primarily on untimely, inconsistent and unreliable practices and estimates from this diverse set of entities.”


A news media journalist always on the go, I've been published in major publications including VICE, The Atlantic, and TIME.

Related Articles

Back to top button