Comments on: ClimatePULSE: Who owns these greenhouse gas emissions?

By: Are You Ready For The New Scope 3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards? | Brightworks Sustainability Advisors

Thu, 06 Oct 2011 18:16:30 +0000

[...] owned manufacturing and operations (known as Scope 1) and for purchased energy (known as Scope 2). The two are considered the de facto standard for global GHG emissions [...]

By: Lrqausa1

Lrqausa1 — Fri, 02 Apr 2010 01:03:01 +0000

Nice Reading. Thanks.
LRQA helps bring integrity, independence and world-renowned recognition to your assurance claims.

Quality-ISO 9001 Training
Environmental-ISO 14001 Training
Greenhouse Emission Management Training
Food Safety Training

By: Carbon Insetting « Advancing Education for Sustainability

Carbon Insetting « Advancing Education for Sustainability — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 22:20:41 +0000

[...] about emissions reductions outside the organization’s own boundaries– which they define as WBCSD’s Scopes 1 and 2 – to generate credits that can be applied against an emissions inventory to claim climate [...]

By: CDP and Supply Chain Carbon Reporting - Supply Chain Management Blog -

CDP and Supply Chain Carbon Reporting - Supply Chain Management Blog - — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 09:16:05 +0000

[...] subtitle: "Managing climate change in the supply chain". In that report they are looking at scope 3 emission management amongst others and this is where things really become [...]

By: Stanley Winborne

Stanley Winborne — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 11:47:32 +0000

Just what is the comprehensive US theory on the ownership of oil and gas reserves? It seems to be split. On public lands – BLM, continental shelf ocean reseerves, Alaskan lands, etc. there seems to be some element of oil as a resource held in common. Yet in Texas, Oklahoma, etc. it seeems that oil is very privately owned even though oil companies may take oil from vast reserves outside of the privately owned oir leased land where they are actually drilling. Where is a source for properly understaning the big picture.

By: Jason Smith

Jason Smith — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:09:10 +0000

From a document released in June 2008 by the California Air Resources Board on a draft local government protocol:
“GHG accounting programs recognize that the indirect emissions reported by one entity may also be reported as direct emissions by another entity. For example, the indirect emissions from electricity use reported by a local government may also be reported as direct emissions by the regionally-serving utility that produced the electricity. This dual reporting does not constitute double counting of emissions as the entities report the emissions associated with the electricity production and use in different scopes (Scope 1 for the regionally-serving utility and Scope 2 for the local government).
Emissions can only be aggregated meaningfully within a scope, not across scopes. By definition, Scope 2 emissions will always be accounted for by another entity as Scope 1 emissions. Therefore, Scope 1 and 2 emissions must be accounted for separately.
Reporting both Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions helps ensure that local governments provide a
comprehensive emissions profile reflecting the decisions and activities of their operations.”

By: Jared Hudden

Jared Hudden — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 19:44:06 +0000

So if I am following you on all this, if utility companies are regulated and so are gasoline companies, than wouldn’t everyone else (home owners, vehicle drivers, and most businesses not in the energy and fuel business) be “off-the-hook”? Isn’t this also just putting the true cost of energy out on the table – whoever gets in that business must pay the actual cost, not the “preferred” cost of climate change denialism? OK – but then no behavior change is required just higher prices because everyone else in the world is scope 3 except for these jerks who have been ripping off the world (especially the 3rd world) for generations. See: There Will Be Blood or Syriana.
OK, I get it. Scopes are there to aknowledge the true culprit without making them pay for the damage they’ve done – instead we’ll all take care of our Scope 3 emissions because we “care a lot”.