How to reduce carbon footprint ?

/in , /by

Reducing carbon emissions has become a priority for organizations across all sectors. Beyond regulatory requirements and stakeholder expectations, understanding and reducing your carbon footprint is a key step toward building a more resilient, efficient, and future-proof business.

What is a carbon footprint?

A carbon footprint represents the total amount of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions generated by an organization’s activities. These emissions are typically expressed in tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO₂e) and include not only carbon dioxide, but also other gases such as methane and nitrous oxide.

By calculating a carbon footprint, organizations gain visibility into how their operations, energy use, supply chains, and products contribute to climate change. This measurement is the foundation for any credible reduction strategy, as it allows companies to move from assumptions to data-driven decisions.

Understanding the three emission scopes

Carbon footprints are structured according to three emission scopes, as defined by internationally recognized standards.

Scope 1 includes direct emissions from sources that are owned or controlled by the organization. This typically covers fuel combustion in company facilities, on-site processes, and company-owned vehicles.

Scope 2 covers indirect emissions associated with the generation of purchased energy, such as electricity, heating, or cooling. Although these emissions occur off-site, they are directly linked to an organization’s energy consumption and can often be reduced through efficiency measures or renewable energy sourcing.

Scope 3 includes all other indirect emissions across the value chain. This may involve emissions from purchased goods and services, transportation and logistics, business travel, waste, and even the use of sold products. For many organizations, Scope 3 represents the largest share of their total carbon footprint and the greatest opportunity for impact.

Two key strategies to reduce your carbon footprint

The first and most important step in reducing emissions is measurement. Organizations need a clear and accurate understanding of where their emissions come from across all three scopes. This allows them to identify emission hotspots, prioritize actions, and set realistic and credible reduction targets. Without reliable data, reduction efforts risk being ineffective or misaligned.

The second strategy is to focus on reducing emissions at the source. Once priorities are clear, organizations can implement targeted actions such as improving energy efficiency, transitioning to renewable energy, engaging suppliers on low-carbon solutions, optimizing logistics, or redesigning processes and products. Sustainable reduction is achieved through long-term operational and strategic changes, rather than short-term offsets alone.

Turning insight into action

Reducing a carbon footprint is not a one-off exercise, but an ongoing process that evolves with the organization. With the right tools, data, and guidance, companies can turn carbon measurement into a strategic advantage—lowering costs, improving efficiency, and strengthening trust with customers, investors, and regulators.

At TSN, we offer specialized consulting and training in key areas such as:

  • Carbon footprint calculation (ISO 14064, GHG Protocol).
  • Emissions reduction plans.
  • Climate transition plans (WWF and other reference standards).
  • Alignment with the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi).
  • Climate resilience strategies, green bonds, and sustainable financing.

Our goal is to help you not only comply with regulations, but to go beyond legal compliance, facilitating effective risk management, real emissions reduction, and the identification of value opportunities.

Want to know more?

If you’d like to better understand your organization’s carbon footprint and identify practical, high-impact reduction opportunities, we offer a free introductory session.

What are the Sustainable Development Goals?

/in , /by

The Sustainable Development Goals, often called SDGs or Global Goals, are a set of 17 broad objectives agreed by all United Nations member states in 2015 as part of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. They form a shared plan to achieve peace and prosperity for people and the planet by tackling issues like poverty, inequality, and climate change in an integrated way.

At their core, the SDGs aim to end extreme poverty and hunger while ensuring that development is socially inclusive and environmentally sustainable. This means that economic growth should improve people’s lives, reduce inequalities, and protect natural systems rather than damage them.

There are 17 Sustainable Development Goals, each with a concise title such as No Poverty, Zero Hunger, Quality Education, Gender Equality, and Climate Action. Together they cover social issues, economic development, environmental protection, and the institutions and partnerships needed to support progress.

Each goal is supported by more detailed targets and indicators that make the agenda measurable and practical. In total there are 169 targets and many more indicators, which help countries track progress on specific issues like child mortality, access to clean water, or renewable energy use.

The SDGs build on an earlier framework called the Millennium Development Goals, which guided global development efforts from 2000 to 2015. While the MDGs focused mainly on poverty and basic human needs in developing countries, the SDGs are broader and apply to all countries, rich and poor.

An important idea behind the SDGs is that the challenges they address are interconnected and must be tackled together. For example, reducing poverty depends on good health, education, decent jobs, and a stable climate, while climate action in turn affects food security and life on land and below water.

The goals also reflect three key dimensions of sustainable development: economic, social, and environmental. Economic goals focus on decent work and growth; social goals address things like health, education, and equality; and environmental goals address climate, oceans, and ecosystems.

Many of the goals highlight the need to “leave no one behind,” meaning that progress should reach the poorest and most vulnerable people first. This includes reducing inequalities within and between countries, promoting gender equality, and expanding access to basic services for all.

The SDGs are meant to guide action not only by governments but also by businesses, civil society, and local communities. They provide a common language and framework for designing policies, investments, and projects that contribute to a more just and sustainable world.

Ultimately, the Sustainable Development Goals represent a global commitment to transform how societies develop by 2030. They seek to ensure that today’s development meets human needs and aspirations without undermining the environment or the prospects of future generations.

As of early 2026, the world is not on track to fully achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030, despite important gains in many areas. The most recent global stocktake shows that only a minority of SDG targets are on track, with many stagnating or going backwards, especially after the combined shocks of the pandemic, climate impacts, and conflicts.

A 2025 assessment of SDG indicators found that around 18% of assessed targets have been met or are on track, about 48% show only moderate or marginal progress, roughly 17% are stagnating, and about 18% are regressing. This means that, with just a few years left to 2030, most targets require a major acceleration if they are to be reached.

On the positive side, there have been notable improvements in areas such as access to education, maternal and child health, and the fight against infectious diseases like HIV and malaria. Digital connectivity has expanded, helping to bridge parts of the digital divide, and access to electricity has continued to grow worldwide.​

Progress on energy is one of the clearer success stories: renewable energy has become the fastest‑growing source of power globally, and 45 countries have already achieved universal access to electricity. These trends support SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy) and contribute to climate and development objectives at the same time.

However, food security and nutrition have suffered major setbacks, and SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) is among the goals most off track. Conflicts, climate shocks, and economic disruptions have increased the number of people facing hunger or food insecurity in many regions.

Environmental and climate‑related goals such as SDG 13 (Climate Action), SDG 14 (Life Below Water), and SDG 15 (Life on Land) also show serious gaps. Deforestation has slowed somewhat, but about 10 million hectares of forest were still lost each year between 2015 and 2020, implying it could take decades to halt forest loss at the current pace.

Social goals present a mixed picture: youth literacy and school participation have improved in regions like sub‑Saharan Africa and Central and South Asia, supporting SDG 4 (Quality Education). Gender representation in national parliaments has increased to just over a quarter of seats held by women, advancing SDG 5 (Gender Equality), but progress has been slowing.​

At the same time, SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth) faces headwinds from slow, unequal recovery and structural challenges in labor markets. Responsible consumption and production (SDG 12) remain problematic: global domestic material consumption rose by about 23% between 2015 and 2022, showing that economies are still heavily resource intensive.

Peace, justice, and strong institutions (SDG 16) are under severe strain, with conflict‑related deaths remaining high and surging in some regions. In 2024, at least one person died every 12 minutes due to armed conflict, and the number of women and children killed in conflicts rose dramatically in 2023–24, driven largely by the war in Gaza.

Looking ahead from 2026, UN assessments emphasize that achieving the SDGs will require rapid action in a few priority areas: transforming food systems, expanding sustainable energy access, accelerating digital transformation, strengthening education, creating decent jobs and social protection, and protecting climate and biodiversity. They also stress the need for more financing, stronger international cooperation, and better policy coherence so that national plans and investments align with SDG targets in the final years to 2030.

EFRAG Unveils VSME Digital Template and XBRL Taxonomy: Empowering SMEs for Digital Sustainability Reporting Copy 2

/in /by

EFRAG has just released its VSME Digital Template and XBRL Taxonomy, designed to streamline and digitalise sustainability reporting for non-listed micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). These tools translate the recently adopted Voluntary Sustainability Reporting Standard for SMEs (VSME) into a user-friendly Excel template and an open-source data taxonomy, helping businesses report in a consistent, […]

EFRAG Unveils VSME Digital Template and XBRL Taxonomy: Empowering SMEs for Digital Sustainability Reporting Copy

/in /by

EFRAG has just released its VSME Digital Template and XBRL Taxonomy, designed to streamline and digitalise sustainability reporting for non-listed micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). These tools translate the recently adopted Voluntary Sustainability Reporting Standard for SMEs (VSME) into a user-friendly Excel template and an open-source data taxonomy, helping businesses report in a consistent, […]

Greenwashing vs. Greenhushing: The Importance of Clear and Responsible Communication 3 Copy

/in /by

Companies communicate with different stakeholders, adapting messages for different purposes: from aspirational messages that reflect the vision of the future, to sales strategies or community involvement initiatives. Communication varies depending on the target audience, whether it’s to inspire, attract consumers, involve the community or align internal stakeholders. With sustainability becoming a “sexy” and attractive topic, […]

California’s Climate Disclosure Regime & New CARB List

/in /by

Understanding Carbon Footprint & Emissions Scopes

A carbon footprint is the total amount of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions produced directly and indirectly by an organization during its operations. To better manage and report emissions, these are categorized into three “scopes”:

  • Scope 1: Direct emissions from owned or controlled sources (e.g. on-site fuel combustion, company vehicles).

  • Scope 2: Indirect emissions from consumed energy (e.g. purchased electricity, heating, cooling).

  • Scope 3: All other indirect emissions across the value chain — supply chain, product use, business travel, waste, etc.

Effective climate regulation increasingly demands that companies measure and report across all three scopes, not just their direct emissions.

California’s Climate Disclosure Regime & New CARB List

California has enacted two landmark climate laws — SB 253 and SB 261 — that shift corporate climate accountability from voluntary action to legal obligation.

  • SB 253 (Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act) requires entities doing business in California with > $1 billion in annual revenue to publicize their Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions.

  • SB 261 (Climate‑Related Financial Risk Act) mandates companies with revenues exceeding $500 million to disclose climate-related financial risks and mitigation efforts, in alignment with frameworks like TCFD.

  • Penalties for non-compliance are significant: up to $500,000 per year under SB 253 and $50,000 per year under SB 261.

  • The first reporting deadlines begin in 2026 for Scopes 1 & 2, with Scope 3 reporting required in 2027.

  • On September 24, 2025, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) published a preliminary list of companies believed to fall under the scope of SB 253 and SB 261.
    – Having your name on this list doesn’t automatically subject you to compliance obligations — and omission doesn’t ensure exemption. CARB invites feedback via a voluntary survey to refine the list.
    – Notably, CARB emphasized that all entities meeting the statutory criteria remain responsible for compliance regardless of list inclusion.
    – CARB is expected to issue proposed implementing regulations by October 14, 2025, triggering a 45‐day public comment period.

This publication is a major milestone in the regulatory rollout — it gives firms early insight into potential exposure and allows them to begin preparatory steps.

The preliminary list is available at https://thesustainability.network/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/SB-253_261_preliminary_list_092425.xlsx 

 

Why This Matters for Businesses

  • The CARB list gives you advance visibility into whether you may be included in California’s compliance regime, but self‑assessment is essential.

  • Even if you aren’t yet listed, your suppliers, clients or parent companies may be — and regulators can demand emissions data across value chains.

  • Regulatory lead time is short: your data systems, governance, and assurance protocols must be in place well before the 2026 reporting kick-off.

  • Entities that act early can turn compliance into a competitive advantage rather than a burden.

 

 

How TSN Supports Your Compliance Journey

At TSN, we provide a full-stack solution to help organizations navigate these new laws:

  • Automated capture and consolidation of Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions data

  • Audit‑ready reporting aligned with GHG Protocol, TCFD, and state disclosure rules

  • Visualization dashboards, gap analysis, and scenario modeling

  • Support in stakeholder communication, verification, and regulatory filing

Whether your company is already on CARB’s list or you want to proactively prepare in case you’re added — TSN empowers you to move confidently forward.

Why the EU Taxonomy Matters: Making Sustainability “Green by Law,” Not Green by Hype

/in /by

Greenwashing is when organizations give a false or exaggerated impression of environmental performance—generic claims like “eco-friendly” or “carbon neutral” without proof that can mislead consumers. The EU has moved to curb this by banning vague, unsubstantiated claims and tightening rules on labels, precisely to stop deceptive marketing that erodes trust.

 

From “claims” to criteria: the EU Taxonomy’s role

The EU Taxonomy is a science-based classification system that defines which economic activities are environmentally sustainable. It translates policy goals into technical screening criteria, so companies and investors can tell what really counts as green. The MIT Sloan Management Review frames this shift as making sustainability “green by law”—you can’t just say you’re green; you must demonstrate alignment with the taxonomy’s thresholds. That clarity is designed to combat greenwashing and channel capital to genuine transition activities. Full MIT article at https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/how-the-eus-taxonomy-combats-greenwashing/

 

Why this matters for consumers and corporate reputation

For consumers, tougher EU rules mean fewer hollow promises and clearer product information—EU “empowering consumers for the green transition” rules enter into application from 27 Sept 2026 after national transposition, raising the bar for durability claims, environmental labels, and repairability disclosures. For companies, misleading claims now carry real legal and reputational risk; consistent, verifiable disclosures improve trust and reduce litigation and regulatory exposure.

 

Data-backed claims—or don’t make them

Across Europe and beyond, regulators increasingly expect substantiated environmental claims. The upcoming Green Claims framework (as advanced in Parliament votes and ongoing policy work) foresees prior verification and penalties up to 4% of turnover, potential confiscation of revenues, and procurement bans—raising the cost of vague marketing and rewarding robust evidence. Even where the legislative path has wobbled, directionally the ask is the same: claims must be specific, science-based, and verifiable.

 

How TSN helps

At The Sustainability Network (TSN), we connect securely to internal systems and data sources (ERP, energy meters, procurement platforms) to automate non-financial data collection, map it to EU Taxonomy/CSRD requirements, and generate audit-ready reports. This reduces manual effort, increases accuracy, and turns compliance into a reliable source of decision-grade insight for management, customers, and investors.

 

Science, facts, and trust

Claims grounded in science—taxonomy criteria, lifecycle analyses, credible methodologies—build durable trust with customers and markets. The Taxonomy and related EU rules give a common language for evidence, while companies that operationalize data governance (definitions, controls, audit trails) find it easier to defend communications and access sustainable finance.

 

The rulebook (EU and international) that shapes claims & penalties

  • EU “Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition” Directive: bans vague environmental claims; applies from 27 Sept 2026 after transposition.
  • EU Green Claims initiative (in flux): Parliament-advanced framework for prior verification of claims; proposed penalties up to 4% of turnover, with revenue confiscation and procurement bans (legislative status evolving).
  • EU Taxonomy Regulation: science-based criteria for sustainable activities; backbone for investors to distinguish real greenness from marketing.
  • CSRD/SFDR: corporate and financial-market disclosure regimes that require consistent, decision-useful ESG data—reducing room for greenwashing.
  • UK: CMA Green Claims Code enforced via consumer law; the CMA now has direct sanction powers and can fine up to 10% of worldwide turnover for misleading practices.
  • US: FTC Green Guides (truth-in-advertising guidance); SEC climate-disclosure rulemaking is under legal uncertainty after the SEC ended its defense in March 2025, but investor pressure and state actions keep momentum for disclosures.
  • OECD: international guidance documenting harms from misleading green claims and promoting truthful environmental marketing.

 

Recent greenwashing cases (last two years)

  • KLM: Dutch court ruled in Mar 2024 that “Fly Responsibly” ads misled consumers—landmark case clarifying limits of airline sustainability marketing. ReutersKennedys Law
  • Lavazza & Dualit (UK): Apr 2025 ASA banned “compostable” coffee-pod ads that implied home compostability; only industrial facilities qualified—ads deemed misleading. The Guardian

These rulings show how fast the enforcement bar is rising and why data, definitions, and context matter.

 

Bottom line

The EU Taxonomy turns sustainability from marketing spin into testable criteria—“green by law,” not green by hype. That serves consumers, protects corporate reputation, and helps capital find credible transition pathways. With TSN’s data integrations and reporting automation, organizations can move beyond compliance, defend their claims with evidence, and build the trust that unlocks investment and long-term value.

Latest Developments on ESRS Regulations (July 2025)

/in /by

The European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) are undergoing a major revision aimed at simplifying requirements and making reporting more practical for companies. On July 31, 2025, EFRAG published the new exposure drafts, which reflect the EU’s shift toward easing the administrative burden under the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD). A key highlight of the revisions is the sharp reduction in reporting complexity—total datapoints have been cut by 68%, and mandatory datapoints alone by 57%. This simplification is designed to make sustainability disclosures more achievable for businesses while retaining their core objectives of transparency and accountability.

The list of changes in detail can be found at EFRAG’s site at https://www.efrag.org/en/amended-esrs-0 .

The revised exposure drafts also introduced a clearer separation between mandatory disclosure requirements (“shall disclose”) and non-mandatory illustrative guidance (NMIG). By removing prescriptive details from the standards themselves and placing them into guidance, the EU hopes to create a more flexible and company-centered reporting framework. This change aims to empower companies to focus on material issues, reduce compliance fatigue, and enhance alignment with other international frameworks like the ISSB, GRI, and SASB.

 

AreaBefore RevisionAfter Revision (July 2025 Drafts)Change (%)
Total datapoints~1,200~380-68%
Mandatory datapoints~400~170-57%
Length of standards~1,200 pages~530 pages-55%
Guidance integrationMixed with mandatory textShifted into Non-Mandatory Illustrative Guidance (NMIG)Structural
Clarity of disclosuresLess distinction between mandatory/optionalExplicit labeling: “shall disclose” vs. guidanceConceptual

 

Alongside the release of the drafts, EFRAG launched a 60-day public consultation process, open until September 29, 2025. Companies, investors, regulators, and civil society stakeholders are invited to provide input via a structured online survey. Their feedback will be instrumental in shaping the final technical advice that EFRAG is scheduled to deliver to the European Commission by November 30, 2025. This consultation reflects the EU’s commitment to participatory policymaking, ensuring that the resulting standards balance investor needs, business realities, and sustainability objectives.

Finally, the revisions must be understood within the broader regulatory timeline of EU sustainability reporting. With the “stop-the-clock” directive deferring reporting obligations for second- and third-wave companies, and the Omnibus simplification package narrowing CSRD’s scope to mainly large entities, the revised ESRS come at a pivotal time. They are intended not just as a simplification but as a recalibration—ensuring reporting remains credible while being manageable.

Legislative adoption is expected to follow in 2026 through delegated acts, which will finalize the revised framework for implementation.

Greenwashing vs. Greenhushing: The Importance of Clear and Responsible Communication

/in , /by

Companies communicate with different stakeholders, adapting messages for different purposes: from aspirational messages that reflect the vision of the future, to sales strategies or community involvement initiatives. Communication varies depending on the target audience, whether it’s to inspire, attract consumers, involve the community or align internal stakeholders. With sustainability becoming a “sexy” and attractive topic, many organizations are integrating their long-term goals, achievements and aspirations into communications aimed at customers and investors, in order to influence decisions such as investments and acquisitions.

However, the problem arises when these messages, assumed to be true by stakeholders, are only partially true, distorted or lack verifiable elements. When decisions are made on the basis of false or misleading information, companies enter the dangerous territory of greenwashing.

 

What is Greenwashing?

Greenwashing occurs when a company communicates messages or information about sustainability that are misleading, exaggerated or false, with the aim of appearing more sustainable than it actually is. This includes environmental or social impact statements that cannot be verified, that omit critical information or that lead consumers, investors or other stakeholders to make decisions based on incorrect perceptions.

In the European Union, greenwashing is regulated by various standards and legal initiatives. In particular, Regulation (EU) 2019/2088, known as the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR), establishes requirements for financial companies to transparently communicate their ESG commitments. In addition, the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (Directive 2005/29/EC) reinforces the ban on misleading commercial practices, including false or unverifiable environmental claims. Recently, the EU has launched initiatives to ensure that environmental claims made on packaging or in marketing communications are supported by concrete and auditable data.

 

What is Greenhushing?

Greenhushing, on the other hand, represents a more cautious approach. Some companies, fearing failure or exposure to public scrutiny, choose to hide or minimize the communication of their sustainability initiatives until they see concrete results. In this case, companies prefer to wait until they have indisputable proof before sharing information about their efforts. While this approach may seem safe, it can lead to a lack of transparency and make it difficult to build trust with stakeholders.

Greenhushing also deprives consumers and investors of information that could be important for purchasing or investment decisions. This lack of communication can give the perception that the company is inactive in sustainability, even when it makes significant efforts.

 

Greenwashing and Fact Checking

The main problem with greenwashing occurs when messages about sustainability are communicated as absolute truths, without providing consumers or stakeholders with the necessary direction to check the facts. If consumers are led to believe that a product, service or company is more sustainable than it actually is, based on partial or misleading information, they are being misled. This not only damages trust, but can also have legal consequences, given the increased regulation around environmental claims.

What often happens is that companies, when trying to convey aspirational messages, unwittingly fall into greenwashing, especially when they don’t provide concrete and verifiable elements to support their statements. For example, when communicating an ambitious target, such as “becoming carbon neutral by 2030”, it is essential to include verifiable details, such as concrete action plans, measurement methodologies and periodic progress reports.

 

A Clear and Responsible Strategy

To avoid falling into greenwashing or greenhushing practices, companies need a robust and responsible communication strategy. This strategy must ensure that all sustainability-related messages are clear, precise and verifiable. Long-term aspirational goals are important, but they must be accompanied by concrete and transparent plans, allowing stakeholders to monitor progress.

Communication must also be balanced: don’t exaggerate achievements or promise unrealistic results (to avoid greenwashing), but also don’t omit ongoing efforts (to avoid greenhousing). Transparency and responsibility are the key to building trust and credibility in an era where consumers and investors are increasingly aware of the environmental and social impact of companies.

Data and Transparency

To avoid falling into greenwashing or greenhushing practices, companies need a robust and responsible communication strategy. This strategy must ensure that all sustainability-related messages are clear, precise and verifiable. Long-term aspirational goals are important, but they must be accompanied by concrete and transparent plans, allowing stakeholders to monitor progress.

For any statement about sustainability to be credible, it is essential that companies collect, monitor and organize solid, verifiable data. The ability to back up statements with factual evidence is what distinguishes responsible communication from deceptive practice. Without reliable data, even the best-intentioned commitments can be called into question.

In addition to internal monitoring, it is essential to simplify the collection and processing of data throughout the value chain. Indirect emissions, resource consumption by suppliers and logistical impacts are all part of the sustainability profile. Automating and standardizing these processes allows for consistency, transparency and alignment with the standards in force.

Finally, collecting data is not enough – it needs to be communicated in a clear, adapted and relevant way to each audience. Investors are looking for evidence of risk mitigation; consumers value responsible practices; regulators demand compliance. By communicating transparently and strategically, companies build trust and position themselves as leaders in a market that is increasingly attentive to sustainability.

 

Ready to take the next step?

schedule free sessionSchedule a free session with our team and discover how TSN can simplify the entire process of collecting and processing sustainability data – from internal operations to the value chain.

We show you how to communicate results effectively to different stakeholders, in multiple languages and in line with the main international standards and frameworks. Transparency, efficiency and credibility, all in one place.

July 2025 US sustainability updates (Federal vs State-Level Momentum)

/in /by

As global pressure for climate accountability grows, many U.S. states are moving forward with comprehensive carbon reporting requirements—filling the gap left by delayed or uncertain federal mandates.

A carbon footprint represents the total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions caused directly and indirectly by an organization. These emissions are typically categorized into three scopes:

  • Scope 1: Direct emissions from owned or controlled sources (e.g. fuel combustion on-site).

  • Scope 2: Indirect emissions from purchased electricity, steam, heating, and cooling.

  • Scope 3: All other indirect emissions across the value chain, including supply chain, business travel, and product use—often the largest and most complex to track.

GHG scopes

 

 

California Leads, Other States Follow

California has taken a bold lead with two landmark laws—SB 253 and SB 261—which require large companies doing business in the state to disclose their full emissions, including Scope 3, and assess their exposure to climate-related financial risks.

Inspired by California’s leadership, states such as New York, New Jersey, Colorado, Illinois, and Washington are advancing similar climate disclosure legislation. While each bill varies slightly in structure, the trend is clear: corporate climate transparency is becoming a compliance obligation, not a voluntary effort.

Federal Landscape: The PROVE IT Act

At the federal level, the PROVE IT Act (S.1863)—a bipartisan initiative—seeks to boost transparency in carbon emissions at the product level. The Act would empower the U.S. Department of Energy to develop and maintain reliable data on the carbon intensity of goods produced in the U.S. and abroad. This sets the foundation for future carbon border adjustments and fairer environmental trade policies, particularly in industries like steel, cement, and aluminum.

State-Level Climate Reporting Legislation

StateBill ID & TitleCovered EntitiesEmissions Scopes CoveredAssurance RequirementsPhase-In DatesFines / Penalties
CaliforniaSB 253 – Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act
SB 261 – Climate-Related Financial Risk Disclosure		SB 253: ≥ $1B revenue
SB 261: ≥ $500M (public/private, in-CA business)		SB 253: Scopes 1, 2, and 3
SB 261: Climate risk-related		Independent third-party assuranceSB 253: 2026 (Scopes 1 & 2), 2027 (Scope 3)
SB 261: Reports due 2026		SB 253: up to $500K/year
SB 261: up to $50K/year
New YorkPending – emissions reporting bill modeled on CA SB 253Large companies operating in New YorkLikely Scopes 1–3Proposed independent assuranceTBDTBD
New JerseyPending – modeled on CA SB 253Large in-state businessesLikely Scopes 1–3Proposed assuranceTBDTBD
ColoradoPending – emissions disclosure legislationLarge companies doing business in COLikely Scopes 1–3Proposed assuranceTBDTBD
IllinoisPending – based on CA SB 253Large businessesLikely Scopes 1–3Proposed assuranceTBDTBD
LouisianaNatural Gas Redefinition Law (2024)Applies broadly to state-recognized energy programsNone – natural gas labeled as “green”NoneEffective immediately (2024)Controversial – no penalties defined
Washington, Maryland, Virginia (Others)Various (e.g., Climate Commitment Act, Clean Economy Act)Utilities and large emittersPrimarily Scopes 1 & 2 via energy policiesVariesOngoingState-specific enforcement mechanisms

 

What This Means for Your Business ?

Even in the absence of a sweeping federal mandate, a growing number of states are requiring robust GHG reporting, particularly including Scope 3, which accounts for most corporate emissions. As Carlin notes, these state laws “cast a strong net” with potential national impact because few major firms operate in only one jurisdiction.

How TSN Can Help

With TSN’s platform, your company can:

  • Consultancy and guidance in the adoption and compliance process

  • Streamline data collection and reporting across Scopes 1, 2, and 3

  • Ensure compliance with California’s SB 253/SB 261 and emerging state bills

  • Build assurance-capable reporting processes, meeting verification standards

  • Adapt to future federal transparency measures, such as PROVE IT

 

Ready to Lead in Compliance & Climate Action?

Whether you’re preparing for California’s new rules, anticipating New York-style bills, or addressing federal transparency efforts, TSN simplifies the path.

Schedule a demo today to discover how our platform enables end-to-end GHG management — from data capture to verified reports.