A simple, practical guide for sustainability teams navigating the latest SBTi direction
As corporate climate strategies evolve, so too do the expectations around how companies use market-based instruments like Energy Attribute Certificates (EACs) and renewable gas certificates.
The Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) has refined its guidance in its latest Net Zero Corporate Standard v2.0 to place greater emphasis on translating commitments into action to drive real-world decarbonisation, transparency, and clearer separation between different types of climate action.
In this piece, we break down what has changed, and what it means in practice for your renewable electricity and renewable gas strategy.
Why SBTi Is Updating Its Approach
Historically, companies often relied on instruments like EACs to achieve Scope 2 targets and demonstrate renewable electricity usage.
SBTi’s updated direction does not remove these tools, but reframes how they are interpreted:
- Greater focus on actual emissions reductions in the physical world
- Clearer distinction between accounting-based claims vs real decarbonisation
- Increased guardrails on how market instruments are used in net zero strategies
The result is not a removal of flexibility, but a tightening of expectations around credibility and impact.
What This Means for Renewable Electricity (EACs)
1. EACs still play a role but mainly for Scope 2 accounting
EACs remain a recognised way to:
- Demonstrate renewable electricity consumption
- Report Scope 2 emissions (market-based method)
- Support action toward Scope 3 targets where electricity consumption is a component
However, SBTi is becoming clearer that:
- EACs do not directly reduce emissions at a system level
- Their role is primarily book-and-claim accounting, not physical decarbonisation
- Guidance on applying EACs beyond Scope 2 is still limited, with SBTi closely aligned to the GHG Protocol’s revisions, which are likely to be published in 2028
2. More focus on “real” decarbonisation alongside EAC use
Companies need to go further than just purchasing EACs. This means combining EACs with actions that influence the real-world energy system, such as:
- Long-term power purchase agreements (PPAs)
- Supporting new renewable capacity
- Procuring higher-impact products (e.g. additionality-linked EACs)
This reflects a broader inclination beginning to be seen in the market toward quality and impact in procurement.
3. Stronger expectations on credibility and transparency
SBTi is placing more emphasis on how claims are communicated.
Companies should expect:
- More scrutiny on what EAC claims represent
- Clear separation between:
- “We use renewable electricity” (accounting claim)
- “We are reducing the amount of electricity we use” (physical impact claim)
The key shift is clarity, not restriction.
4. Tighter deliverability requirements and hourly matching
Introduction of more precise delivery requirements between consumption and generation of energy.
Voluntary recognition has been introduced for hourly matching of generation and consumption SBTi has signalled that these requirements will evolve alongside developments to the GHG Protocol over the next few years.
What This Means for Renewable Gas Certificates
1. Renewable gas faces closer scrutiny than electricity
Renewable gas certificates (e.g. from biomethane) have been explicitly recognized as part of supporting Scope 1 strategy by SBTi. They are, however, under more scrutiny compared to electricity-based instruments. This recognition is not yet final: certificates cannot be officially recognised or accounted for under market-based mechanisms for Scope 1 until the GHG Protocol completes its next round of updates. In the meantime, the Standard says instruments not reflected in a company’s physical inventory are reported separately, and for Scope 1 may only be used for fuels sourced from shared systems such as the gas grid.
This is because:
- The link between certificate purchase and real emissions reduction is less direct
- Supply constraints and infrastructure limitations create complexity
2. Not all renewable gas use is treated equally
SBTi’s implementation hierarchy (Standard V2.0, Chapter 4) asks companies to assess and implement direct, activity-level action first, before acting within the wider system their gas is supplied through (such as the gas grid or supply shed) and, only where structural constraints exist, at sector level. Certificates used in this way must match the same fuel, generally fall within 12 months of the underlying consumption, be tracked in a secure registry to prevent double counting, and come from programmes that demonstrate decarbonisation of the relevant system. SBTi has said it will publish further guidance. This points toward clearer differentiation between:
- Physical use of renewable gas (direct connection or injection into supply)
- Certificate-based claims without physical linkage
In simple terms:
- Physically using renewable gas is viewed as stronger decarbonisation, as SBTi states that actions directly reducing emissions in a company’s physical GHG inventory form the primary basis for target delivery, while market instruments not reflected in the inventory are reported separately (Standard V2.0, Chapters 4 and 5)
- Certificate-only approaches may face more limitations over time
3. Greater focus on real emissions impact
Like electricity, the direction of travel is:
- Less emphasis on certificates as standalone solutions
- More emphasis on how renewable gas contributes to actual emissions reduction
This means companies should:
- Evaluate all the options open to them and use a combination of solutions, with certificates complementing rather than replacing direct action to reduce Scope 1 emissions
- Expect evolving guidance from the SBTi, driven by the upcoming developments to GHG Protocol standards, on what counts toward targets
What Has Not Changed
To avoid confusion, some fundamentals remain the same:
- EACs are still valid for Scope 2 market-based reporting, and remain crucial, especially in certain markets
- Renewable energy procurement remains a core pillar of corporate decarbonisation
- Flexibility still exists across global markets and strategies
EACs continue to offer a practical and scalable way to match electricity use with renewable generation
What This Means in Practice for Companies
1. Move beyond “volume matching” only
It is no longer just about buying enough certificates to match consumption.
Companies should think about:
- Where energy is coming from
- Whether procurement supports creation of new renewable energy supply
- The credibility of the product
2. Build a more balanced strategy
A robust approach now typically includes:
- EACs for Scope 2 reporting
- Higher-impact procurement (e.g. a long-term PPA, EACs from new projects in the same grid region as your consumption, or supply matched to your consumption hour by hour) for credibility and storytelling
- Direct mechanisms (e.g. PPAs) for real system change
3. Be precise in how you communicate claims
Internal and external messaging should clearly distinguish between:
- Renewable electricity usage
- Emissions reduction through reduction of electricity use
- Contribution to energy system change
The Bottom Line
SBTi is raising the bar on how EACs are used and communicated.
The direction is clear:
- EACs = valid for accounting, but not sufficient on their own
- Renewable gas = can support Scope 1 strategy, but must complement rather than replace direct action to reduce Scope 1 emissions
- Overall = shift toward credibility, transparency, and actual decarbonisation
For companies, this is an opportunity to strengthen strategies, not a constraint, moving from simple compliance toward higher-quality, impact-driven energy procurement.
