UN climate scientists have concluded that since the Industrial Revolution, we’ve already warmed up the planet by 1 degree Celsius—as evidenced by the terrifying number of recent droughts, famines, storms and floods. These same scientists have concluded anything above 1.5 C of warming will cause catastrophic climate change, and at 2 C, the damage will be irreversible.
At our current rate of emissions, without making any reductions, we will reach 1.5 C of warming in the early 2030s, which is why collective action is so urgently needed.
What is a science-based target?
A “target” is simply a public ambition for decarbonization, ideally with a stated timeline and strategy for how to get there. Targets are considered “science-based” if they’re in line with the 1.5 C objective laid out by the UN.
The Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) is an organization focused on supporting the private sector in setting and hitting these targets. More than 4,000 companies, over a third of the global economy, have set targets via SBTi.
Unilever is planning to achieve net zero across its value chain by 2039. Diageo is working toward 2030; Amazon and Walmart have committed to 2040; and Volkswagen will be net carbon neutral by 2050 “at the latest.”
But notice how the last example uses different language. “Carbon neutral” is not a commitment to emissions reduction—and if you find that confusing, you’re not alone. Climate language can be misleading and very open to interpretation. Nike’s Move to Zero initiative has been an interesting example of this, highlighting an overall passion and commitment from the brand—with some impressive sustainability initiatives—but without actually setting a formal SBTi net zero target.
