Food and candy maker Mars set a goal in 2021 to match 100 percent of annual electricity use at its offices and factories — roughly 2 terawatt-hours in 2025  — with contracts for clean energy such as solar and wind power. 

Now it’s committing to do the same on behalf of suppliers and customers through a new initiative dubbed Renewables Acceleration. 

The program, launched in April, will use Mars’ experience in negotiating power purchase agreements to arrange additional contracts that cover the estimated amount of electricity used in the production, distribution and consumption of its goods. Initially, that could be another 6 to 7 terawatt-hours of electricity, three times what Mars is already planning to buy.

The rationale: Many Mars suppliers are too small and inexperienced to procure electricity from solar or wind farms on their own. While many large companies push suppliers to adopt emissions reductions strategies and buy renewables, they aren’t transitioning fast enough at a time when climate experts are calling for a tripling in renewable energy capacity by 2030.

So far, Mars has signed enough clean energy power purchase contracts to cover 58 percent of its own electricity consumption, as of the company’s 2024 environmental update. Extending this idea to the Mars supply chain creates an opportunity to cover electricity related to smaller suppliers it cannot engage directly, said Kevin Rabinovitch, global vice president of sustainability and chief climate officer at Mars. Meanwhile, it will help Mars’ biggest business partners focus resources on investments or process changes to reduce emissions directly. 

“The most exciting thing about this is this lets us do something fast at scale that can help contribute to this sort of broader goal of tripping renewables and taking action now,” he said.

How the concept works

Mars came up with the idea for this approach three years ago, as it contemplated new ways to cut Scope 3 emissions, which reflect upstream activities at suppliers (such as growing raw ingredients) and downstream consumption of its products (such as microwaving a rice pouch).

The sustainability team studied product life cycles to calculate the electricity use tied to each phase. The approach doesn’t contemplate other factors that contribute emissions, such as methane production at dairy farms.

For example, here are ways electricity is used for a Mars rice product:

• Fertilizer production
• Farm equipment, such as irrigation systems
• Ingredient processing and packaging
• Distribution warehouses
• Retail stores and logistics activities
• Consumer usage

Mars calculates the amount of electricity related to these functions and activities using greenhouse gas emissions inventory data it already collects for carbon accounting purposes and publicly available government data, and then extrapolating what portion comes from electricity.

The company figures that about 10 percent of its total carbon footprint can be addressed with the Renewables Acceleration approach. That’s where Mars came up with the 7 terrawatt-hours number it’s seeking to address through this approach.

The calculations weren’t easy because you have to “crack open” the data, Rabinovitch said, but many multinational companies have access to these metrics. “I think everyone will agree that doing activity-based footprinting is better than spend-based forecasting because you get more precision, more accuracy, more insight,” he said. 

Mars plans to apply the renewable energy certificates (RECs) from the clean electricity it buys to cover these activities to its Scope 3 inventory, rather than Scope 2, where calculations related to energy used for Mars’ direct operations are reflected. 

“There’s no functional difference between a manufacturer retiring an [environmental attribute certificate] for a supplier and the manufacturer selling or even simply giving the supplier the REC who then retires it themselves,” Mars said in a white paper explaining Renewables Acceleration. “However there is a huge practical difference in that a manufacturer coordinating REC transfers to thousands of suppliers and customers and millions of customers is incredibly inefficient and adds no climate benefit.”

No precedent  

There’s no established methodology for an approach like Renewables Acceleration under existing Greenhouse Gas Protocol reporting guidance, Rabinovitch said, but there’s also no specific restriction prohibiting the approach. 

“If you’re looking for the answer from a standard that was written long before you had the idea, it becomes a hurdle to innovation,” he said.

Mars still plans to work directly with suppliers to encourage direct investments in clean electricity and other emissions-reduction activities, such as regenerative agriculture practices or manufacturing equipment upgrades.

While important, initiatives of that nature tend to yield progress slowly, which is one reason to assess approaches such as Renewables Acceleration seriously, said Oliver Hurrey, founder of consulting firm Galvanised. “If you look at the process to get suppliers invested in renewables, it is overly complicated. Are we guilty of over-engineering and not getting on with the things we need to do?” he said.

What’s next

Mars hasn’t negotiated a contract using the Renewables Acceleration method yet, but it’s working on the first deals. In addition, Rabinovitch is advocating the initiative with other large multinational companies that have experience negotiating solar and wind power purchase agreements. He’s seeking feedback and hoping to get other companies interested in embracing the approach. 

“It’s probably more the sophisticated buyers, where they already know how to buy renewables,” he said. “They’re comfortable with the rules for that, and they’re comfortable with how to sell [the idea] to their business. The only novelty is you’re now covering a megawatt-hour that’s in Scope 3, as opposed to Scope 2.” 

The post Why Mars plans to more than triple the amount of renewable energy it buys appeared first on Trellis.

Staff at major aviation companies, including Air France, KLM, Airbus and Lufthansa, are among hundreds of industry insiders calling on their leaders to undertake dramatically more ambitious action on climate.

The demands, organized by a pressure group known as Call Aviation to Action (CAA), include several that are at odds with the industry’s position on climate change, such as setting absolute emissions reduction targets. Hitting such targets would likely require limiting service, another strategy at odds with current plans.

“Call Aviation to Action started because we discovered that there are many, many people in the industry who are really concerned about climate change, but also very committed to aviation, and who were not able to speak up,” said Karel Bockstael, an aviation consultant and former vice president of sustainability at KLM who initiated the project with four other aviation professionals.

The industry’s existing net-zero ambition rests in part on the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA), a 2016 agreement that requires participating airlines to cap emissions at 85 percent of 2019 levels. Any subsequent growth must be offset by purchasing CORSIA-approved carbon credits. 

Around 30 airlines have also committed to near-term goals with the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi), or had those goals validated by the organization. To align with warming of no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius, the SBTi requires airlines to reduce emissions intensity by 30 percent and 50 percent in 2030 and 2035, respectively.

Fossil fuels ‘until the end of time’

Neither standard is sufficient if the industry is to stay within planetary boundaries, say the 443 people who have signed the CAA’s statement since it was issued in May. 

Bockstael argued that CORSIA is flawed because many offset projects have failed to deliver claimed climate benefits. “It will support the fossil kerosene solution until the end of time,” he said. “If we do that then the growth will go on and at some point the availability of the offsets will not be enough.”

He praised the intent of the SBTi aviation standard, which requires that the industry as a whole stay within a total carbon budget identified as consistent with 1.5 degrees of warming. But CAA says the standard is undermined by overly optimistic assumptions about efficiency improvements and the idea that fossil jet fuel can be eliminated by 2050.

The organization argues instead that airlines should set a carbon budget for the industry — acknowledging a fair distribution of the budget across populations — then bring their goals in line with it. Signatories are also asking companies to lobby for regulation that “takes all players in our industry along in what is needed to respect the boundaries we are currently transgressing,” be more realistic about future technology gains and better manage demand, particularly in regions that have a larger share of historic emissions.

Insider influence

Environmental groups have long made similar demands, but the CAA is notable for its insider approach. Among the signatories are professionals working in supply chain, business development and strategy, as well as several pilots. Likely because of Bockstael’s connections, that includes more than 40 employees of KLM and Air France, Europe’s largest airline group.

“At KLM, we are doing everything we can to make flying cleaner, quieter and more fuel-efficient, step by step,” a company spokesperson told Trellis. “Making aviation more sustainable takes time, and progress isn’t as fast as we would like. But that doesn’t mean we’re standing still.” The airline is investing more than $8 billion in more efficient aircraft, the spokesperson added, and is one of the world’s largest purchasers of sustainable aviation fuel.

“The fact that the calls for change are coming from within the aviation sector and from the employees themselves and even some senior leaders is very promising,” said Deborah McNamara, executive director of ClimateVoice, a non-profit that supports employee-led climate action. “They’re the people who know what it’s like to work in this industry and who shape it.”

The group has continued to consult backers on next steps, which Bockstael said would be announced this fall.

The post 443 insiders (and counting) press aviation leaders to accelerate climate action appeared first on Trellis.

In a footwear first, a new Allbirds’ sneaker features material that has been recycled from polycotton waste.

The Remix runners, which retail for $140, are made with lyocell recycled by startup Circ from used polycotton T-shirts and other textiles. The midsoles are recycled from manufacturing-scrap foam by partner Blumaka, and the laces are made of recycled polyester.

“We created Remix because it directly aligns with our central commitment: to make better things in a better way,” Allbirds CEO Joe Vernachio said of the 8,000-pair capsule collection. “That commitment demands that we not only look to materials of tomorrow, but also explore how we can make use of materials available today.”

The company has cemented its identity around the use of natural fibers — New Zealand Merino wool, eucalyptus and sugar cane — and unique forays into reducing footwear emissions: In February, Allbirds announced offset-free “net zero” Moonshot shoes that have a tiny carbon dioxide footprint of roughly 1 kilogram. It open-sourced the methodology, inviting copycats.

Until now, though, Allbirds’ circular practices have focused predominantly on a ReRun branded resale program rather than on recycled materials. So the Remix line is a shift for the company. It is the next step for the industry as well.

“This collaboration with Allbirds marks a major milestone in proving that textile-to-textile recycling can scale beyond apparel and into a high-performance category like footwear,” Circ CEO Peter Majeranowski said. “Footwear requires an entirely different level of durability, resilience and performance compared to apparel. Materials need to withstand repeated wear, flex and environmental stress. The challenge was ensuring that our recycled lyocell fibers could be spun, woven and finished into textiles that not only looked and felt premium, but also had the strength and stability required in a shoe upper.”

“Although we — and the footwear industry at large — have a ways to go to address the issue of manufacturing waste, Remix is a step in the right direction, and we’re proud of the progress it represents,” Vernachio said. “While we grapple with some of the complex questions around circularity and end-of-life, we’re sharply focused on keeping products in use.”

A challenging marketplace

Although countless Silicon Valley geeks — not to mention Barack Obama — have sported Allbirds’ understated, logo-less shoes, the brand has struggled with falling sales and stock prices since going public in 2021. At the time it dubbed itself “the first ‘sustainable’ IPO,” a statement it later retracted under SEC pressure.

Tim Brown and Joey Zwillinger founded the certified B Corporation in 2015 as a Kickstarter project with an anti-petroleum bent. One early exception to its otherwise natural-fiber lineup was the “Futurecraft.Footprint” shoe, a collaboration with Adidas that used 30 percent recycled polyester and 70 percent lyocell.

Currently, athletic shoes make up about 40 percent of the market for sustainable footwear, according to Fortune Business Insights.

Increasingly, sneaker designers are working to develop “circular” products from recyclable and biobased materials and with 3D printing. The demand for non-synthetic fibers in footwear — whether virgin or recycled — remains relatively niche. Natural fibers in apparel, footwear and industrial applications combined will expand from $69 billion last year to $95 billion in 2030, according to Grand View Research.

That’s dwarfed by the global market for recycled polyester sneakers, which is expected to expand from $465 million in 2023 to $958 million in 2034, according to Transparency Market Research.

North Carolina recycler Unifi dominates this space, providing its Repreve recycled polyester to Nike and numerous other footwear and fashion brands. However, Repreve derives from bottles, a controversial practice among advocates of closed-loop recycling. Unifi also recycles used polyester textiles into new material called Repreve Takeback, which features in Teva sandals.

“Giving brands more options for sustainable materials is a step towards overall sustainability,” said Cynthia Power, co-host of the Untangling Circularity podcast and a fashion industry consultant. “If they can plug these materials into their supply chains without raising costs significantly and continue to make their customers happy, we should expect to see more sustainable circular materials in footwear.”

The post Allbirds debuts waste-based shoes appeared first on Trellis.

Corporate energy buyers looking to fulfill clean electricity and emissions reduction pledges are rushing to negotiate and close contracts for U.S. solar and wind development projects as the window for qualifying for related tax credits shrinks.

The surge in demand after months of hesitation have pushed U.S. power purchase agreement (PPA) prices up 4 percent since the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) on July 4. That’s according to a special report published Aug. 13 by LevelTen Energy, which tracks transactions on a quarterly basis. The average cost of a PPA in North America was $57.04 per megawatt-hour in the first quarter, according to LevelTen’s pricing index, available to subscribers.

OBBBA sunsets many renewable energy tax incentives far earlier than the rules set out by the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). Solar and wind projects must start construction by July 2026 to benefit, and new Treasury rules make the definition for “safe harbor” even tougher: Developers must demonstrate “physical work of a significant nature” to claim credits over a much shorter period of time. 

Close to 70 percent of clean energy buyers feel “more urgency to act immediately” to find available projects, lock in potential tax incentives and get ahead of future electricity price increases, LevelTen’s research found.

An even bigger number — 95 percent — said PPAs remain a key part of their company’s decarbonization strategy even as prices rise. Buying unbundled renewable energy certificates in order to claim emissions reductions was the second most popular strategy.

Gut check: corporate energy procurement

“All signs and the data indicate that procurement is absolutely still important,” said Rob Collier, senior vice president of marketplaces for LevelTen. “There is a sense with both developers and buyers that now is the moment to secure transactions with projects that are able and eligible to qualify.”

LevelTen typically issues quarterly energy procurement trend reports. The data in its special report was gathered in late July and reflects roughly 250 projects available for corporate offtake agreements. The firm also surveyed and interviewed close to 100 procurement teams evaluating potential deals.

Approximately 16 percent of the buyers plan to pause or reevaluate their procurement plans, while 5 percen indicated there would be no change. 

“The buyers best positioned to succeed are those with internal alignment, agile procurement pathways and a focus on signing PPAs with tax-credible-eligible projects,” LevelTen said in its report. “The most competitive projects are moving into exclusivity within weeks, not quarters.”

Wild cards: tariffs and new carbon accounting rules

Complicating matters alongside the OBBBA-related scramble are tariffs on materials such as steel that are making the cost of energy infrastructure more expensive, and proposed changes to commonly used carbon accounting rules that guide how to count emissions reductions related to renewable energy purchases. 

A draft proposal under consideration by the Greenhouse Gas Protocol would require companies to match power consumption with low-carbon energy on an hourly basis, in the same grid region where their facilities are located. The revision is expected to be published for public comment this fall. Although it wouldn’t take effect for several years it’s unclear how existing PPAs will be affected.

“All of this collectively is making it harder to add electricity supply at a time when there is a broad acceptance that energy needs are increasing,” said Rick Margolin, director of resource optimization and renewable energy at advisory firm Engie Impact. “If demand is to grow the way we are projecting, we need more supply.”

The tax incentive changes will increase the cost of corporate offtake agreements, but PPAs for solar and wind projects are still a sound option for companies seeking more price certainty over the long term. Energy spending is projected to increase between $8-$14 billion across the industrial sector by 2035, super-charged by the demand for artificial intelligence infrastructure, according to a Rhodium Group forecast.

“What isn’t talked about enough is that even when you take away the credits, the levelized cost of energy is still lower than all of your other forms of energy, including new hydro,” Margolin said.

Challenge: slow internal alignment

Almost 90 percent of developers have shifted construction plans as a result of the OBBBA, with 46 percent planning to “commence construction for as many assets as possible” before July 5, 2026, according to the LevelTen report. Solar projects will benefit the most from this acceleration, as the Trump administration adopts additional obstacles meant to discourage wind farm development.

Sustainability professionals and energy buyers should get individuals on their finance and legal teams involved early as negotiating cycles compress from months to weeks in the pre-deadline rush, experts said. 

“For large entities, especially those with little prior PPA experience, getting core stakeholders to sign off on a PPA — while simultaneously educating them on the gravity of the current moment — is an immensely tall order,” LevelTen said.

Interest in emerging clean energy options such as small nuclear and geothermal is growing as the pricing dynamics change and because the OBBBA still favors them with incentives, said Bryen Alperin, managing director at tax incentive specialist Foss & Co. In addition, buyers are more likely to consider installing energy storage alongside solar projects, since they are treated more favorably.

“We may eventually have to assign some value to these technologies,” he said. “Maybe we see more focusing not just on reductions, but on resilience and the stability of the grid.”

The post Higher prices, fewer deals: What’s in store for clean energy buyers appeared first on Trellis.

The opinions expressed here by Trellis expert contributors are their own, not those of Trellis.​

As the world prepares for COP30 in the heart of the Amazon, the role of nature and forests will be elevated like never before. Brazil is setting the agenda, not just as host, but as a leader in evolving how forest protection and restoration are financed. With the U.S. government largely absent from tropical forest diplomacy, a new generation of Global South-led initiatives is filling the gap, and changing the landscape for corporate action.

For corporate sustainability teams focused on climate and nature, COP30 isn’t a technical debate. It’s a strategic shift with real implications for reporting, procurement and net zero strategies. Two big developments stand out: new financing models for large-scale forest protection and a wave of investable reforestation and restoration initiatives that are gaining traction. Both will shape how companies engage with nature-based solutions over the next decade.

Shift 1: Innovative finance is getting real

Nature-based solutions have often struggled to attract sustained investment due to inconsistent funding flows, the complexity of safeguards designed to ensure environmental and social integrity and uncertainty about long-term returns. These safeguards, which are essential to protect Indigenous rights, ensure equitable benefit-sharing and strengthen climate impact, have sometimes created additional barriers for investors and corporate partners. That’s starting to change. One of the clearest examples is how Brazil is scaling up jurisdictional forest protection through new financing mechanisms that combine public policy alignment, independent monitoring, and performance-based payments.

In Tocantins state, for example, the government is on track to issue what could be Brazil’s first jurisdictional-scale forest carbon credits, covering 27 million hectares across the Amazon and Cerrado. But what’s innovative isn’t just the size; it’s the structure. The program blends upfront private capital with results-based carbon revenue, grounded in state policy and supported by more than 40 consultations with Indigenous peoples, traditional communities and smallholder farmers to date. Importantly, these programs use robust benefit-sharing frameworks and monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) systems to meet integrity expectations from buyers, regulators and civil society.

Another major development is the Tropical Forests Forever Facility (TFFF), proposed by the Brazilian government. Unlike carbon credit markets, which pay for emissions reductions, the TFFF is designed to provide long-term, predictable payments to countries that maintain low deforestation rates. These payments are based on satellite-verified preservation of forest cover, creating a complementary incentive for keeping forests intact even after deforestation is significantly reduced. While TFFF doesn’t involve the sale of carbon credits, it adds another dimension to jurisdictional forest finance, particularly for countries like Brazil that are actively pursuing both emissions reductions and long-term forest maintenance.

For corporate sustainability leads, this opens up several new options for investing in vital forest ecosystems:

• Credible jurisdictional credits: Companies can support carbon reductions that minimize the risk of leakage while securing permanence. These jurisdictional efforts are backed by full territorial oversight and represent a meaningful evolution from traditional project-level investments, offering new opportunities for scale and integration without replacing the vital role that well-governed projects continue to play.
• Blended finance participation: Early-stage investments in enabling conditions (e.g. land titling, satellite monitoring, or community capacity building) can support wider forest outcomes and demonstrate strategic leadership.
• Integrated supply chain engagement: Jurisdictional programs create the opportunity to link commodity sourcing goals (e.g. deforestation-free soy or beef) with climate mitigation efforts at regional scale.
• Support for long-term protection: While the TFFF is designed primarily as a government-to-government mechanism, it reflects a growing recognition that forest-rich countries should be financially rewarded for maintaining intact ecosystems. Companies can align with this shift by supporting complementary jurisdictional approaches and engaging in advocacy for more stable, long-term forest finance.

Shift 2: Reforestation and restoration are maturing

Reforestation and restoration in Brazil are moving from fragmented pilots to coordinated, investable portfolios—especially across degraded pastureland.

One of the most ambitious efforts is the Brazil Restoration and Bioeconomy (BRB) Finance Coalition, launched in 2024. The coalition aims to mobilize $10 billion by 2030 to restore over five million hectares of native vegetation, much of it in high-priority biomes like the Atlantic Forest, Cerrado, and Amazon.

Restoration projects under BRB generate returns from multiple sources, including high-quality carbon removal credits, certified timber and agroforestry products and community-led bioeconomy businesses. By blending concessional and commercial finance, BRB members are helping projects access upfront capital for planting and maintenance while attracting long-term investors.

For companies, particularly those with nature targets under frameworks like the Science Based Targets Network (SBTN) or the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD), this offers a credible way to:

• Invest in long-term carbon removal in line with net zero commitments
• Support biodiversity, water security and rural economic development
• Demonstrate leadership in regenerative sourcing and nature-positive strategy

As restoration pipelines mature, corporate engagement will be expected to move beyond pilot partnerships to meaningful, scalable investment. BRB and similar initiatives show what that transition can look like.

Why these shifts matter

Until now, many corporate nature strategies have been limited to offsetting emissions or supporting small, localized conservation efforts. But that model now sits within a broader landscape of expectations. Companies are increasingly expected to support approaches that align with national strategies, deliver real results that improve business outcomes and scale impact across entire landscapes. As finance for nature becomes more sophisticated, so too do the expectations around quality, transparency, and long-term impact.

To meet these shifts, sustainability teams will need to adjust in several areas:

• Target setting: Science-based targets for nature (e.g. under SBTN) require companies to engage across full value chains and landscapes, not just within operational boundaries.
• Investment strategy: Investors and customers increasingly scrutinize whether nature-related investments are additional, scalable and aligned with Indigenous and local community priorities.
• Procurement: Forest-risk commodity sourcing must now consider regional governance and deforestation trends, not just supplier-level compliance.
• Disclosure: Emerging frameworks like TNFD require companies to assess and disclose nature-related dependencies, risks, and impacts. Jurisdictional and restoration initiatives offer credible inputs for these assessments.

COP30 will be a moment of global attention and scrutiny. It will be a political summit hosted in the world’s largest rainforest, shaped by the priorities of forest-rich nations and framed around the global need to protect, manage and restore natural ecosystems. Companies that can clearly articulate how their nature strategies align with high-integrity public programs will be better positioned to lead. 

The post What you need to know about nature finance ahead of COP30 appeared first on Trellis.