And as it turns out, almost no one does seem to think Scope 3 is material. So we end up with the absurd situation where airports claim they are carbon-neutral because they ignore the emissions from the planes that fly from them and coal mines can make the same claim because they say someone else burns the coal that they mine, and they claim that’s got nothing to do with them when glaringly obviously that’s untrue.
My points then are very simple ones.
First, any accounting standard for greenhouse gas emissions that does not require Scope 3 disclosure is incomplete. In fact, it’s not a standard worth calling by that name because it ignores a crucial issue.
And second, anyone who claims they are carbon-neutral and ignores their Scope 3 emissions is making a claim that is simply not true.
And we need to say both of these things time, after time, after time.
OK. BP is including the emissions from the petrol it sells in its emissions responsibility. Therefore I, driving a petrol fueled car on gasoline bought from BP am carbon neutral. Because those emissions have already been accounted for up the supply chain.
Which is, obviously enough, ludicrous. Therefore so is the suggestion.