In March, the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) released the first draft of its Corporate Net-Zero Standard v2, kicking off a public consultation process as part of SBTi’s broader revision process for the standard. Importantly, the draft standard advances the conversation on the role of carbon dioxide removal (CDR) in reaching corporate net-zero targets. SBTi highlights the need for CDR to address residual emissions and offers three options for integrating CDR for that purpose. The draft standard also considers the appropriate role for low- versus high-durability forms of CDR and how to ensure that CDR is high quality and delivers promised climate benefits.

In response to SBTi’s public consultation, RMI convened academic, civil society, and industry stakeholders to develop a joint position statement on key aspects of the Corporate Net-Zero (CNZ) Standard v2 consultation.

Below the Position Summary, you will find three resources:

• Position Statement. Outlines the core positions and the stakeholders who have signed on in support.
• Working Paper (Executive Summary and Full Paper). Provides greater detail, research, and analysis on each of the core positions.
• Calculator Tool. Estimates CDR demand under different implementation scenarios of the CNZ v2.

Position Summary

The group’s collective statement consists of the following key positions:

1. Increasing ambition. Interim removal targets should require gradually increasing annual targets for CDR procurement, rather than cumulative targets, to provide a clear demand signal to the market for the volumes that will be needed to serve SBTi companies at net zero.
2. Interim removal targets to address residual emissions. Interim removal targets should be required starting in 2030 for companies with net-zero targets. If companies begin procuring removals before 2030, they should be recognized for doing so.
3. Minimum durability threshold. To fully address the atmospheric impact of residual emissions in a science-based way at the point of net zero, removals should be matched to emissions on a “like-for-like” basis such that the durability of the removals counterbalances the atmospheric lifetime and warming effect of the original emissions. We propose to phase in like-for-like by 10 years before a company’s net zero date to create a more gradual ramp up while still charting a course to a science-based framework.
4. CDR quality criteria. CDR used to meet interim removal targets must be verified by an unconflicted third party, and other widely accepted quality criteria should be required. Some quality characteristics that SBTi should consider include additionality, net negativity, reverse traceability, data transparency, and adherence to sustainability, environmental impact, and equity criteria.
5. Addressing Scope 3 emissions. SBTi should require aviation emissions in companies’ Scope 3 to be addressed by interim removal targets. Additionally, SBTi should recognize companies that choose to include Scope 3 emissions within their Interim Removal Targets and express intent to review the question of removals that address Scope 3 emissions in the future. 
6. Fostering innovation. The world will need a portfolio of CDR approaches; investing in innovation and learning through deployments is therefore critical to achieving long-term climate targets, but procurement from nascent approaches may not yet meet all quality criteria. SBTi should support the need for innovation in CDR, for example, by recognizing purchases and investments in nascent CDR approaches under the Beyond Value Chain Mitigation category.

Link to position statement, paper, and calculator

Additional information on the position

The creation of this position in response to SBTi’s public consultation on the CNZ Standard v2 was a collaborative effort. To do so, RMI convened two groups. The first group was comprised of CDR ecosystem members from civil society and academia. The second group was made up of stakeholders in the CDR industry. RMI developed the Position Statement with regular and detailed input and feedback from both groups. Please see the Working Paper for a list of acknowledgements. Additionally, RMI and other stakeholders in the working group sought feedback from companies with SBTi Net Zero Targets.