An inside look at how net-zero corporate standards are made

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

The Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) just opened a new consultation round on its latest Corporate Net-Zero Standard draft, the long-awaited update to its first-of-a-kind 2021 standard, expected for final publication in 2026. Meanwhile, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) working group is deep in negotiations on its Net Zero Transition Plan standard, part of one of the largest multilateral consensus processes in the international standards system. That draft is expected to go to global public consultation early in the new year.

Having spent many months toiling over both as a member of both expert working groups, I’ve learned they play distinct but complementary roles in global climate governance. SBTi provides technical precision on how companies should interpret science-based pathways. ISO offers a broader, international framework that guides how organizations plan and deliver net zero in diverse contexts. 

Over the coming public consultations, LinkedIn will surely light up with explainers dissecting the technical details of these two tools for setting companies on a path to net zero. Yet the most important and overlooked aspect of both standards is not what they say — it’s how they’re made.

The inner workings of standards

While it may be hard to believe given the polarization across the globe, I’ve had a front-row seat to the extraordinary democratic efforts behind each of these drafts. SBTi staff, for example, process 70 days worth of reading in comments they receive each time they run a consultation. ISO, for its part, convenes hundreds of national representatives from industry, civil society and science across its 170-plus member countries debating in real time, online and in person, to build true global consensus.

Voluntary initiatives like SBTi can move fast, with full-time staff dedicated to research, review of latest science, piloting and probing of new technical solutions to advance at the ”frontier of good practice.” ISO develops globally legitimate, auditable frameworks that can be used by governments and organizations and understood as widely accepted “common international good practice.” Both engage in broad engagement with thousands of voices across geographies, supply chains, finance and civil society, solving interpretive challenges that no single government or company could address alone.

Recent years of experimentation with corporate net-zero strategies have sharpened the focus on practical implementability. Revising standards to reflect real-world constraints, while remaining true to the science of our dwindling carbon budget, requires delicate navigation of cost burdens, competitiveness, fairness and innovation.

Hot-takes coming over the next few weeks will likely focus on trade-offs such as:

  • How to manage Scope 3 emissions robustly without spreading companies too thin
  • How carbon credits can be credibly used or how durable removals neutralize residual emissions
  • How quickly sectors across geographies must decarbonize given varied capabilities and responsibilities

These are emotional issues, and rightly so. They touch livelihoods, investment and visions of fairness. And yet, both standards are advancing through compromise grounded in broad consultation.

Whether we like every clause that lands in the drafts, we should appreciate the intention and expertise that shaped them. At a tenuous moment for representative democracy across the world, i’s powerful to witness intensive and inclusive governance in action.

A democratic process

Standards aren’t just climate action playbooks; if done correctly, they’re living examples of deliberative democracy.

This matters. Without climate standards backed by good governance, we drift toward fragmentation such as:

  • Every company inventing its own definition of “net zero”
  • Powerful sectors writing rules that serve only themselves
  • Confusion and non-comparability for investors, civil society and regulators

That path leads us away from fair, green competition and into climate chaos, a world where companies deplete shared resources and pollute shared skies without guardrails. Good standards provide a path through the chaos, built on argument, evidence and collective decision-making.

Of course, no governance system is perfect. Who is in the room, how evidence is weighed and when consensus is required are all tough choices in themselves that introduce real trade-offs. And voluntary standards cannot replace public policy. We still need enforcement and widespread adoption.

But the upcoming standards will emerge from consultation with thousands of stakeholders. That legitimacy is worth defending.

So as consultation season kicks off, I have one call to action: participate vigorously and generously. Offer critiques while keeping sight of the bigger picture. In addition to dissecting the standards, don’t forget to share your support for these living documents, because they’re the results of democratic exercises in progress.

Those who benefit from eroding democracy and the planet would like nothing more than to see the climate community lose faith in its own collective processes. We cannot afford that.

In classical Athens, the birthplace of Western democracy, fierce agonistic argument was encouraged before a vote. But once a decision was made, persuasion ended and compliance began as a civic commitment to one another.

As the next round of corporate net-zero standards emerges, perhaps the greatest contribution we can make is not the cleverest metric, but a renewed commitment to one another and to the output, as a result of good-faith governance.

Strong processes don’t guarantee perfect outcomes. But they do make better outcomes possible. Climate standards will never be perfect, but they keep us together, anchored to science and collective progress. At this moment, more than ever, examples of democracy in practice deserve our support.

The post An inside look at how net-zero corporate standards are made appeared first on Trellis.

What to watch for at the U.N.’s COP30

As world leaders gather in the Amazon region for the latest United Nations Conference of the Parties, climate progress looks frail. The Belém, Brazil, event marks a decade since 195 nations agreed to the Paris Agreement, and emissions, global temperatures and numerous other indicators of planetary health are at perilous levels.

To date, the climate summits have been a parade of pledges without much hard progress to celebrate. This one, however, nicknamed the “implementation COP,” asks governments to show how they’ll actually meet their climate targets. That may result in ratcheting up pressure on the corporations driving so many emissions. “This COP must ignite a decade of acceleration and delivery,” said U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres on Nov. 6.

However, the heaviest emitters — the U.S., China, India — won’t join COP this time. (President Donald Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris pact is on track to finish in January.) And with key business events in São Paulo, fanfare from individual corporations so far appears muted, despite collaborative groups like We Mean Business, Principles for Responsible Investment, Ceres and the World Economic Forum.

Here are five calls to action for business likely to emerge as the main sessions start Nov. 10:

Mobilize $1.3 trillion in climate finance

On Nov. 5, the Baku-to-Belém Roadmap spelled out how nations can move $1.3 trillion of climate finance collectively by 2035. That goal, set last year at COP29 in Baku, Azerbaijan, also enlisted developed nations to lead with $300 billion or more each year for developing countries. That is achievable, according to the World Resources Institute.

But in 2022, just $22 billion of $116 billion in climate finance came from private sources. That suggests that banks and other corporations must not only shift how much they invest, but where — out of fossil fuels and toward high-impact sectors and regions, according to the 100-page roadmap. They should also understand how their supply chains, procurement and operations create investment opportunities in emerging markets, noted the authors. In addition, the goal should expand beyond mitigating emissions to fostering adaptive and nature-based solutions.

Define and scale adaptation finance

Jamaica is only the latest nation to reel from a strongest-yet climate event, Hurricane Melissa. To help the many more to follow, summit negotiators are tasked with agreeing on the first global goal on adaptation.

Within the $1.3 trillion target for climate finance, the U.N. is specifically asking for public and private actors to step up on adaptation finance that helps communities brace for and cope with climate-change impacts. Only up to $28 billion of this is flowing each year, yet developing countries are going to need hundreds of billions annually by 2030, according to the United Nations’ Adaptation Gap report, issued Oct. 29.

Its message for businesses: Treat adaptation as a central core strategy, not charity. Build resilience into operations. Use your capital and expertise to scale local adaptation finance. Then, prove it through disclosure and measurement.

Protect forests and biodiversity

Biodiversity watchdogs and Indigenous justice groups have cited a July ruling by the International Court of Justice that nations must protect nature and limit their emissions. Such voices are also calling for COP30 leaders to back the Tropical Forests Forever Facility model, released on Nov. 6. The financial tool would reward nations that protect rainforests. Land and legal rights for Indigenous populations and sustainable ocean plans are other focus areas.

What does that ask of business? Listen to local communities within value chains, scrub deforestation risks out of sourcing maps and create traceability for commodities, among other strategies.

Accelerate decarbonization and disclosure

At COP30, the U.N. is pressuring governments to submit their latest credible action plans, a.k.a. Nationally Determined Contributions. These plans are meant to specify pathways for finance, technology and policy. That pressure especially falls on heavy industry, shipping and other hard-to-abate sectors to prove out their work to decarbonize. It’s likely that COP30 will impose rigorous reporting requirements on companies that currently apply to nations, under the Paris Agreement’s Enhanced Transparency Framework.

Early movers can go beyond net zero targets to backing and following through on low-carbon activities and supply chains. Those just beginning can find efficiencies and sign off on science-based pathways.

In turn, We Mean Business, speaking for groups representing 135,000 companies, issued an ask for heads of state and government: Stop subsidizing fossil fuels and free up investment for electrification, renewable energy and storage.

Support credible carbon markets

A movement is building to accelerate support for well-vetted carbon credits to supplement direct decarbonization work. On Nov. 4, the Coalition to Grow Carbon Markets, which was started by France and Panama and has since gained broader support, called for strengthening business incentives “to invest in high-integrity carbon credits” including in Article 6 markets, which let countries swap credits with one another. Brazil is proposing an Open Coalition for Carbon Market Integration that would connect such systems across interested nations.

The writing on the wall for businesses integrating carbon credits: Use them strategically because markets, standards and regulations are moving quickly and reputational scrutiny is rising.

The post What to watch for at the U.N.’s COP30 appeared first on Trellis.

Green transition momentum strongest in Global South

Building on sentiments from how people engage emotionally with climate action, research shows people in the Global South express strong support for environmentally-friendly development and a willingness to make personal sacrifices to achieve it.

Countries such as Kenya, Colombia, Peru, Vietnam, Nigeria, India, Indonesia, Thailand, South Africa and Brazil stand out for their strong support for a greener future and high willingness to make sacrifices to achieve it, according to survey by Trellis data partner GlobeScan. In contrast, enthusiasm for green progress often stops short of personal trade-offs in the Global North, reflecting a more cautious, comfort-driven approach. Many countries in the Global North, including the U.S, U.K., France, Germany, Japan and Australia, fall into the quadrant of lower support and lower willingness to sacrifice, signaling a need for different engagement strategies.

What this means

Accelerating the global green transition requires recognizing regional dynamics. Tailored strategies that reflect local motivations and realities will be essential to drive meaningful climate action worldwide. In the Global North, the challenge is to make sustainable choices easier, more affordable and more aspirational. In the Global South, there is clear momentum for ambitious change and a readiness to act. The strong correlation between support and willingness to sacrifice in the Global South signals that these countries have the social foundation needed to drive progress if other conditions (economical, political, structural) permit. In the words of former UN Climate Change Executive Secretary Christiana Figueres: “The world is no longer waiting for Washington. This time the Global South is leading the way.”

Based on a survey of more than 31,000 people conducted July — August 2025.

The post Green transition momentum strongest in Global South appeared first on Trellis.

What we learned at Trellis Impact 25

Between new disclosure rules, mounting data expectations, political pushback and rapid tech change, sustainability has entered a new, more scrutinized phase. Climate work now demands a sharp discipline that ties impact to business value and financial strategy.

That pragmatism was on display at Trellis Impact 25 in San Jose, California, where sustainability leaders convened to share what’s working — and where friction remains. 

One way to take the pulse of the moment is to look at which sessions drew the biggest crowds. Those would be:

  • “Shaping the Future of Scope 2: Corporate GHG Strategies Amid Evolving Standards,” 
  • “The Next Frontier: Data Centers Powering Energy Innovation and Community Impact” 
  • “Catch a Falling Knife: Navigating a New Era of Renewable Energy Procurement” 

Yet another way is to comb through attendees’ LinkedIn posts for key trends and takeaways. And in the spirit of “better us than you,” here’s what we found:

1. AI joins the sustainability team

That AI was a recurring subject surprised no one. It was hailed as a promising accelerator for sustainability work, from emissions accounting to data governance. Especially exciting was agentic AI, which, as one participant writes, can “analyze multiple sources of supply chain data faster and more comprehensively than ever before.”

The mood, though, wasn’t blindly bullish. Presenters cautioned against overreliance and “solutionism.” Their advice: Treat AI as an extra set of hands, not the ultimate decision maker.

2. Data is the differentiator — if it drives impact

The conference’s best-attended session focused on evolving corporate greenhouse gas strategies. But in the Scope 2 universe, greater granularity can be as burdensome as it is beneficial if the data doesn’t drive outcomes.

For example, “hourly deliverability” requirements for Scope 2 emissions are a complex standard that can overwhelm companies with limited resources without necessarily moving things forward.

3. Nature moves from margin to mainstream 

Nature is emerging as a business-critical priority. Companies are adopting frameworks like those of  the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD) and Science Based Target Network (SBTN) to measure nature-related impacts and dependencies, recognizing that protecting nature mitigates risk and improves resilience.

As one post noted, though it’s early days for most corporate nature strategies, momentum is building. Integrating nature into business strategy — by quantifying the economic benefits of agroforestry, for instance — can create value for companies and ecosystems alike.

4. Scope 3 is a teamwide endeavor

No company decarbonizes in a vacuum. Supply chains can be labyrinthian but also present opportunities for shared action.

“Activating suppliers on clean energy often means shared investment or procurement models,” one attendee wrote. Put another way, Scope 3 successes rely on building strong relationships and aligning incentives across the value chain.

5. Carbon gains ground in climate finance

Speakers framed carbon as a lure to attract capital and a lever to unlock progress.

Of particular interest were carbon offtake agreements, which create predictable cash flows and drive project financing. But their future depends on credible market demand and reliable forecasting that lets buyers plan long-term commitments.

Insurance is another enabler. “It’s critical for financing first-of-a-kind projects,” one attendee posted, emphasizing production insurance, which protects lenders if a project underdelivers.

6. Business value sustains climate action

Sustainability strategies built on business value survive shifting politics and market pressures.

“External reporting and target-setting has slowed,” noted one attendee. “But companies are continuing to invest in climate action where there is a business case around risk management and financial incentives.”

The post What we learned at Trellis Impact 25 appeared first on Trellis.

Samsonite wheels its way to circular luggage

Their suitcases survive a car crash, a piano drop and a crowbar assault. Samsonite commercials from several years ago convey a longtime durability message that fits the company’s recent circularity push.

The luggage maker is increasingly making recycled and repairable materials central to its products and emissions goals.

“When we ask the luggage and bag consumer, durability is the top choice criteria, but repair and sustainable materials are other important considerations,” Samsonite VP and Global Head of Sustainability Marina Dirks told Trellis.

Last year, 40 percent of the company’s net sales included products with recycled content, up from 23 percent the previous year. In September, Samsonite launched what it considers a milestone: mainstream products that incorporate learnings from pilot projects. Components of the Paralux rolling suitcases include 100-percent recycled aluminum pull tubes; half of the hard polypropylene shells from recycled sources; and fully recycled fabrics, zipper tape and inner linings.

“Circularity in durable consumer products is an exciting and fast-developing space,” said Steve Diacono, strategic design manager at the Ellen MacArthur Foundation in England. “Many durable products have become almost synonymous with the curbside. We’ve all seen that old suitcase or dirty mattress abandoned on the street. These products still hold value, yet they often end up as waste because disposal is expensive or inconvenient for consumers, and recovery systems remain limited.”

Products with long lifespans are ideal for circular design, added Diacono, noting Samsonite’s experiments feeding material from old suitcases into new ones and formulating wheels for easy fixes should they fail.

Since 1910

Registered in Luxembourg with U.S. offices in Mansfield, Massachusetts, Samsonite saw $3.6 billion in 2024 sales for its Tumi, American Tourister and other brands, a modest 2.4 percent dip from 2023. The company has been listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange since 2011, following numerous twists since its 1910 origins as the Shwayder Trunk Manufacturing Company of Denver.

Recycled materials are core to Samsonite’s emissions goals, validated in March by the Science-Based Targets initiative (SBTi). Ninety-five percent of its climate footprint derives from Scope 3. Eighty percent comes from purchased goods and services, which Samsonite aims to slash 52 percent by 2030 over 2022 levels per unit of gross profit. (Its emissions progress is tied to financial performance.)

Consulting globally across sourcing, product development, designers, brand and marketing personnel, Dirks’ team found out about future product plans, then explored how to dial up their recycled content.

Screen grab from a Samsonite video featuring its Essens capsule collection, which includes plastic recycled from used suitcases. Credit: Samsonite

“Our vision is to really use our leadership position to create a more sustainable future for our industry,” she said. Conducting a materiality assessment including third-party suppliers confirmed that approach.

Sourcing varies geographically. Initially, for manufacturing in Belgium, the company sourced recycled polypropylene from things like yogurt cups and other household waste. In Asia, it took plastic from recycled laundry machine barrels.

Circular evolution

The emphasis on circular materials emerged in 2018 with Samsonite’s first “eco collection,” which used recycled plastic bottles in linings and soft casings.

Smaller collections, like the Essens Circular suitcases introduced this spring, were partly sourced from material in suitcases returned by consumers. They incorporate plastics derived from restaurant cooking oil. Supplier LyondellBasell provided the “biocircular” material, certified under the International Sustainability and Carbon Certification mass balance approach. 

Essens also marked Samsonite’s first use of Digital Product Passports, letting consumers scan a QR code to view lifecycle details.

Testing and tradeoffs

Samsonite tests its products in regional labs. Most suppliers test components, too. The company evaluates each component before assembly: Can it handle high heat and humidity? How about rough handling?

Sustainable design must balance durability, repair and innovative materials, according to Dirks, former director of global sustainability at Tiffany & Co. 

Plastics recycled multiple times can become less durable, unlike aluminum. That’s why outer shells, fabric linings and pull handles have higher recycled content than wheels, which are central to suitcase functionality.

“We all know how a piece of luggage might be thrown around by an airline no matter how careful they are,” Dirks said. “It just needs to be able to withstand a lot more than some other applications of recycled materials.”

Repair

Dirks’ team also considers the tension between long-lasting products and eventual repairs. “If you buy a car, it’s to be expected you service it once a year,” she said. Samsonite consumers already “have that expectation that no matter how durable it is, things happen.”

For those cases, Samsonite seeks to simplify repair options through stores, at home and via third-party centers. Paralux owners can replace a busted wheel or pull handle at home, guided by videos using shipped parts. “The only thing you need to replace is a pin,” Dirks said. Shipping small parts rather than whole products further reduces emissions.

Diacono noted that steps like these are the kind of progress needed for durable consumer goods. “To unlock real impact, circular business models — such as rental, repair and refurbishment — need to scale,” he said.

Other sustainability progress

Samsonite continues to use 100 percent renewable energy in its own operations, achieved two years ahead of schedule in 2023. It also surpassed a 15 percent carbon intensity reduction goal for 2025. However, the company has not submitted a net zero goal to the SBTi. Dirks, who reports to CEO Kyle Francis Gendreau, said the company is watching how the SBTI’s standards evolve. However, current sustainability metrics don’t incentivize product durability and other circular practices. 

“From a target-setting perspective,” Dirks said, “that puts you in a worse place than if you were to design a product that just has a very low carbon footprint, but maybe breaks a year into use.”

The post Samsonite wheels its way to circular luggage appeared first on Trellis.

Why businesses hold the key to financing forests of the future

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

Forests could deliver one-fifth of the climate solution we need by 2030, yet they still attract only a small fraction of global climate finance. Funding for forests comes in at about $84 billion per year compared with the roughly $300 billion required by 2030 to meet global climate and biodiversity goals — leaving an annual gap of around $216 billion, according to the State of Finance for Forests 2025. 

For decades, the money hasn’t matched the science. But that may finally be changing.

After years of pledges and pilot projects, a clear plan is emerging for integrating public policy, jurisdictional programs and private capital into a unified roadmap for action. It builds on earlier efforts of voluntary climate mitigation frameworks, forest projects via the Green Climate Fund and the New York Declaration on Forests by bringing them together at a far greater scale. 

The vision is for forest finance to be coordinated across levels of government, anchored in national policy, implemented through state-led programs and backed by private investment. This integration of public and private capital, reinforced by transparency and accountability standards, makes it far more durable than previous attempts. With COP30 in Belém approaching, the question is no longer what to do, but how fast we can move.

A portfolio approach for forests

The new Forest Finance Roadmap — launched by 34 governments in the Forest Climate Leaders Partnership in collaboration with COP30 and Brazil’s leadership — lays out a pragmatic plan for scaling investment into tropical forests. It recognizes that no single mechanism can close the forest finance gap and instead calls for a portfolio of complementary approaches: innovative finance mechanisms; high-integrity jurisdictional forest credits; investment in the forest bioeconomy; and fiscal reforms that reward forest resilience.

Together, these initiatives show how coordinated public policy, bioeconomy investment and jurisdictional action can help close a meaningful share of the forest finance gap.

Brazil offers a glimpse of what this looks like in practice. The federal government has committed $1 billion to the Tropical Forests Forever Facility finance mechanism, rewarding countries and jurisdictions that keep deforestation low by providing direct, performance-based financial payments. At the same time, it’s scaling investments in the forest bioeconomy, creating markets for sustainable forest products and new industries that generate income while keeping trees standing.

At the state level, jurisdictional programs like one in the Brazilian state of Tocantins bring together land-use policy, Indigenous participation and carbon finance to protect more than 27 million hectares across the Amazon and Cerrado biomes. 

Forests as a business priority

For companies, the message is clear: forest conservation is no longer a philanthropic gesture — it’s a strategic business priority. Businesses dependent on forest-linked commodities such as soy, beef, palm oil, pulp and paper or timber face growing exposure to regulatory, transition and reputational risk. By investing even a fraction of the financial value at risk, companies can unlock billions in forest-positive finance while strengthening supply chains and investor confidence.

Several leaders are already showing what this looks like. Nestlé is partnering with local governments in Indonesia on jurisdictional sourcing, linking supply chains to verified deforestation-free landscapes. Unilever is channeling long-term private finance into Southeast Asian forest protection, while Walmart is mobilizing suppliers to accelerate carbon and nature-positive sourcing.

At the same time, the emergence of high-integrity carbon markets and finance mechanisms presents new opportunities for companies to contribute to and benefit from global climate goals. To seize these opportunities, companies can move from awareness to action by embedding forest finance into core business strategy. Starting points include:

  • Assess exposure and opportunity: Map where supply chains intersect with forest-risk commodities or high-value forest regions and identify jurisdictions aligning with national forest protection policies.
  • Engage in high-integrity markets: Participate in verified jurisdictional or project-level carbon programs that align with national forest protection strategies and emerging market integrity standards.
  • Invest in enabling conditions: Support capacity building, monitoring and community partnerships that make forest programs investable and equitable.
  • Align internal incentives: Integrate forest metrics into corporate sustainability KPIs, procurement policies and financing decisions.
  • Collaborate and advocate: Join coalitions or dialogues that help strengthen policy coherence between business, state and federal levels.

As governments align fiscal policies and public incentives with forest protection, companies that lead on transparency, long-term value creation and policy engagement will be best placed to shape a more coherent, credible and investable market. The State of Forest Finance 2025 shows that private investment in forests remains modest and often misaligned with forest outcomes, underscoring the need for companies to step up to turn good intentions into real capital flows.

The next move belongs to business

Forests aren’t charities. They’re infrastructure for climate stability, water and life itself. The roadmap is here, the mechanisms are ready, and the political will is building. The next move belongs to business. If companies act now by aligning procurement, investment and climate strategies with high-integrity forest finance, COP30 could mark the year forest finance finally scales from promise to performance.

The post Why businesses hold the key to financing forests of the future appeared first on Trellis.

What Spanberger’s win in Virginia means for the data center-energy debate 

Democrat Abigail Spanberger’s victory in the Virginia governor’s race puts her at the center of a debate raging across the U.S.: How can the country stay ahead in the artificial intelligence race while shielding people from big energy bills and more pollution?

Spanberger, as part of her broader affordability agenda, promised to make data centers pay their “fair share” of power costs in Virginia — home to the world’s largest concentration of such facilities. To meet their voracious demand for electricity, Spanberger wants to accelerate clean energy projects, including solar, battery storage, offshore wind and small nuclear reactors.

How Spanberger tries to deliver on those promises will be closely watched by policymakers in other states where Big Tech is racing to build new AI data centers, as well as by companies trying to balance their digital footprint with sustainability goals. Microsoft, Amazon, Meta and Google all reported year-over-year increases in greenhouse gas emissions from 2023 to 2024, mainly due to the construction of new data centers and higher energy use for training AI models. 

“A lot of states will be looking at what the Spanberger administration does, because there could be an energy-cost crisis here if this isn’t managed correctly,” Brennan Gilmore, executive director of Clean Virginia, an advocacy group formed to counter the utility Dominion Energy’s influence in the state legislature, said. Clean Virginia donated $500,000 to Spanberger’s campaign.

Rising costs

Virginia has more than 600 data centers, with potentially dozens more on the way. Dominion Energy said this year that it has more than 40 gigawatts of power requested by data centers — double the company’s current peak demand. As a result, Dominion plans to spend about $50 billion between 2025 and 2029 to upgrade the power grid and build new energy resources, with about 80 percent going to carbon-free sources such as offshore wind and solar, and 20 percent on gas. 

Spanberger and consumer advocates argue that it would be unfair to saddle regular customers with the bill, given that data centers are the primary driver of new power demand. 

This year, Virginia regulators have already approved about $400 million in rate increases requested by utilities, according to an analysis by PowerLines, a nonprofit focused on lowering utility bills. The trend is playing out across the country. More than $34 billion in rate increases have been requested or approved so far in 2025 — more than double the same period in 2024 — affecting 124 million customers, the analysis showed. 

Those increases aren’t solely attributable to data centers; utilities are upgrading aging power grid infrastructure, including transmission and distribution lines, said Mark Christie, director of the Center for Energy Law & Policy at William & Mary Law School. 

“We’re really paying for capital assets,” said Christie, who previously served as chair of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. “That’s what’s driving the cost of power bills, not just in Virginia, but everywhere. I’m talking about transmission, distribution and generation.”

Consumer and clean energy advocates in Virginia said Spanberger has a good chance of enacting her agenda because Democrats gained full control of the state government on Election Day.

Here are three key issues to watch once Spanberger takes office in January: 

Dominion’s data center case before Virginia regulators

Spanberger said she wants data centers to pay more for their power costs, but hasn’t offered specific policy proposals. (Her campaign did not respond to a request for comment for this article.)

During a debate in October, Spanberger said she’s watching what the Virginia State Corporation Commission, which regulates utilities, does in Dominion’s latest rate case. The utility wants large energy users, such as data centers, to pay a higher share of the costs of power generation, transmission and distribution upgrades. 

“Pending the results of that case, as it moves forward, it may require action within the General Assembly to ensure that large utility users, like data centers, are paying their fair share for the energy that they consume,” Spanberger said.

Expanding solar and battery storage

Democrats will likely propose legislation to encourage clean energy projects at homes, businesses and industrial sites, said Gilmore of Clean Virginia. Spanberger endorsed the idea in her energy platform and said she also supports advanced energy technologies, such as small nuclear reactors, geothermal and hydrogen. 

Her predecessor, Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin, earlier this year vetoed several clean energy bills that would have encouraged smaller solar projects and directed utilities to triple energy storage over time. He argued that the technology was too expensive and the cost would be passed on to consumers. 

Rejoining the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative 

Virginia may also rejoin the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), a carbon cap-and-trade market among 10 East Coast states. The initiative — which requires utilities to pay for every ton of carbon dioxide they emit above a limit set by each state — is designed to encourage a shift from fossil fuels toward clean energy. The less utilities pollute, the less they spend. RGGI has raised billions of dollars since 2009, which states are required to invest in energy efficiency and climate resilience programs. 

Opponents, including Youngkin, argue that RGGI is a tax on consumers because utilities pass the costs on through higher bills. He moved to withdraw Virginia from RGGI membership in 2022 via an executive order, but a federal judge ruled that he acted unlawfully. 

Spanberger said she will “negotiate the best ratepayer deal” to rejoin the initiative and ensure the proceeds are used for energy efficiency projects “in line with Virginia statute.”

The post What Spanberger’s win in Virginia means for the data center-energy debate  appeared first on Trellis.

Atlassian’s formula for balancing AI and climate ambition

Like other enterprise software companies, Atlassian is spending billions of dollars to beef up the use of artificial intelligence in its core products. And as is the case for its peers and competitors, that strategy is putting pressure on its net-zero agenda.

Atlassian, which counts 80 percent of the Fortune 500 — including Ford and Pfizer — as customers, sells software that facilitates workplace collaboration. 

Its greenhouse gas emissions has increased 85 percent since its 2019 baseline year, reaching 164,346 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent in the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024.

During the same time, Atlassian’s revenue more than tripled, to $4.4 billion, which halved the intensity of its carbon footprint on a per-revenue basis. Intensity is a measure that some fast-growing companies, including Salesforce, are using for validated emissions reduction targets related to their supply chain, which falls into the Scope 3 category.

Atlassian hasn’t adjusted its goals yet, but it is reviewing them on the way to setting new five-year commitments, Atlassian Chief Sustainability Officer Jessica Hyman told me last week during our fireside chat at Trellis Impact 25. 

“We have to understand that progress is not linear,” she said, in addressing her company’s slow progress. “We need to take this not as a defeat, but rather to say, ‘Now I know where we need to double down.’ ”

The right relationships

Atlassian fell short of a FY2025 goal to get 69 percent of suppliers to set science-based emissions reduction goals; that number was 12.3 percent as of the FY2024 update. Its path forward will lean on closer partnerships with key suppliers, especially the hyperscalers it uses to host its software, Hyman said. 

Atlassian has a longstanding relationship with Amazon Web Services, and it disclosed a multi-year contract with Google’s cloud services division in August. The company’s climate goals are integrated into procurement negotiations as a standard business practice. 

“When you move way up the chain of your top suppliers, the folks in your company that manage those relationships are going to be sitting close to the executive team,” she said. “We’ve spent years building those relationships and knowing who the influencers are.”

Hyman reports to Atlassian’s legal team, which ladders up to the chief financial officer. The company has six climate working groups that include representatives from sustainability, finance, procurement, risk and compliance, public policy, travel, cloud financial operations, workplace experience and real estate. So it’s vital for business leaders to “speak the language” of every other team. “I have to be able to take our net-zero strategy and translate it for a chief revenue officer just as well as I can for our general counsel just as well as I can for the people team leader,” she said.

Hyman advises sustainability professionals to spend more time understanding how their company’s digital footprint will be affected by corporate AI initiatives. Atlassian experienced an 83 percent increase over the past year in customers asking about its emissions targets, in large part because of its AI strategies. 

“I think we have to own that this is new territory for all of us,” she said. “There’s a lot of humility that you can bring to the table by saying, ‘Hey, I want to understand how AI and this transformation is going to fit into my net-zero goal.’ Get to your engineering teams, get to your heads of AI and get to your hyperscalers, and just ask the questions and start learning.” 

The post Atlassian’s formula for balancing AI and climate ambition appeared first on Trellis.

Unilever sustainability chief Rebecca Marmot steps down

Send news about sustainability leadership roles, promotions and departures to [email protected].

Rebecca Marmot, who has been part of Unilever’s sustainability strategy for almost 20 years and its chief sustainability officer since May 2019, is leaving the company for an undisclosed new role. 

Her replacement is Michael Smith, a long-time communications strategist, who joined Unilever on Oct. 1 as chief corporate affairs and communications officer after serving in a similar role at accounting and consulting firm PwC.

Though Smith will lead global sustainability, it won’t be reflected in his title.

Marmot’s role expanded to include public affairs in December 2024, a move reminiscent of the early days of corporate sustainability when sustainability and social responsibility were often integrated into marketing and public relations. She kept the title of CSO even though operational management of sustainability initiatives is handled at the business division level. 

That change came one year after former Unilever CEO Hein Schumacher overhauled the company’s approach to the function, giving individual brand managers responsibility for stewarding environmental initiatives.

Unilever’s groundbreaking Sustainable Living Program, introduced in 2010 by then-CEO Paul Polman, was an inspiration for many other companies, but powerful shareholders pushed back on that agenda. 

“We have too many long-term commitments that failed to make sufficient short-term impact, and the latter is what the world really needs right now,” Schumacher said in announcing the shift.

Marmot recalled the “grand goal-setting days” in a July interview with the Two Steps Forward podcast, co-hosted by Trellis Founder Joel Makower.

They “were brilliant at the time, having vision and being able to galvanize and bring enthusiasm behind an agenda,” she said. “But now I think business skills and acumen are absolutely critical. If I don’t understand — and my counterparts don’t understand — what we need to do as a business, we won’t be able to truly embed sustainability.” 

Career trajectory

Marmot left L’Oreal to join Unilever in April 2007 as an external affairs manager, eventually launching the company’s first foundation before being asked to lead a team that combined global sustainability strategy, advocacy and policy and partnerships, such as Unilever’s relationship with the United Nations Global Compact. 

She was the face of the company’s high-profile reviews of its trade association relationships, which examine the potential for the organizations’ policy stances to align with Unilever’s own goals.

“I feel excited about the future but it’s also been a wrench to leave,” she said in a LinkedIn post. “Leading Unilever’s external engagement and sustainability work globally has been absolutely brilliant.”

Marmot’s replacement, Smith, led communications, public policy, sustainability and reputation management at PwC.

Previously, he was part of the executive committee at the world’s biggest public relations firm, Edelman, which Unilever uses. The longest tenure of his career was at consulting firm McKinsey, where he left as global director of communications and marketing. He has worked on projects with the U.N. Global Compact and the Prince of Wales International Business Leaders Forum.

The post Unilever sustainability chief Rebecca Marmot steps down appeared first on Trellis.

Carbon market turnaround continues as buyers eye more purchases

Is the carbon market emerging from its years-long slump? 

A series of new findings suggests it is. Buyer confidence, which had been severely dented by exposés of flawed projects, appears to be returning as market quality inches upward.

The most recent data comes from a survey of businesses in 30 countries carried out by SE Advisory Services, the consulting arm of energy technology company Schneider Electric. Asked about purchasing plans between now and 2030, more than half of respondents said they expected to increase engagement with carbon markets — 29 percent moderately and 26 percent significantly.

The shift is driven in part by the spread of new emissions reduction regulations, particularly in Asia, that allow companies to use credits to hit targets. “These early movers are building the inventories, relationships and capabilities they will need when voluntary becomes mandatory,” the report authors noted. 

Buying better

Buyers, particularly those new to the market, are also using new quality signals. The Schneider report found that 55 percent of respondents looked for the Core Carbon Principles, a quality label developed by the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market that rubber-stamped its first methodologies in summer 2024. Although the council’s decisions aren’t a guarantee of quality — several of its first approvals were questioned by independent experts — the label is considered a relevant part of a due diligence process nonetheless.

Buyer demand for quality seems to be slowly shaping the market. The integrity of credits issued and retired has been trending steadily upwards since 2021, as measured on a 10-point scale used by Calyx Global, an independent rater of credit projects.

Carbon credit quality trends

A similar uptick was seen by the finance intelligence provider MSCI, which rates carbon projects from AAA to CCC. The company’s second annual report on market integrity, published in September, noted that 35 percent of credits retired in the first half of this year were rated BBB or above, compared with 25 percent in 2022. 

Higher-quality credits are also commanding higher prices, according to an index maintained by Calyx and ClearBlue Markets that offers tools to help companies navigate carbon markets.

Prices for carbon credits in different quality tiers

MSCI data aligns with this: Credits in the company’s high-integrity index traded at more than four times the price of those in its low-integrity index, compared with a two-fold difference in 2024.

‘Intractable’ problems

Still, the most talked-about publication in recent months probably isn’t any of the above. It’s a review of the academic literature on carbon credits, by Joseph Romm at the University of Pennsylvania, which concluded that many popular offset types have “intractable” quality problems. 

Many in the industry said Romm’s paper flagged known problems that are being addressed by the integrity council and other organizations. Others — including the Guardian, one of the fiercest critics of carbon markets — cited it as yet-more evidence that carbon credits cannot be trusted. The carbon market may be evolving, but its ability to divide opinions remains unchanged.

The post Carbon market turnaround continues as buyers eye more purchases appeared first on Trellis.