Thousands of corporates have validated science-based targets (SBTi). Scope 3 dominates their footprint, and the standard route is supplier engagement targets — 'X% of our suppliers by spend will have science-based targets by 2027'. That sentence, multiplied across your customer list, is the fastest-growing carbon-reporting pressure on mid-size industrials.
A GHG reduction target validated by the Science Based Targets initiative against 1.5 °C pathways. The cross-sector default: cut absolute Scope 1+2 emissions ~42% by 2030 from a recent base year (≈4.2% linear per year), include Scope 3 where it exceeds 40% of the total, and reach net-zero (~90% absolute reduction) by 2050 under the Corporate Net-Zero Standard.
| Request | Form it arrives in |
|---|---|
| CDP climate questionnaire | annual, scored A–F; procurement reads the score |
| Corporate carbon footprint | Scope 1+2 minimum, product-level increasingly |
| Reduction target | own SBTi commitment, or at least a published trajectory |
| Product carbon footprint (PCF) | per-SKU embedded CO2 — standard in automotive/chemicals |
| Evidence of action | implemented measures with quantified savings |
None of this is law — it's contractual. Which makes it faster than law: the questionnaire arrives with the RFQ.
What credibly answers 90% of these requests: (1) a fuel-based Scope 1+2 inventory; (2) one or two implemented efficiency measures with verified numbers — this is where a heat-loss project earns its keep, ~4.2%/yr is exactly the size of saving a first insulation survey typically finds; (3) a stated target and the measure list behind it. The certificate tool formats item 2.
A 1.5 °C-aligned path needs ≈4.2% absolute reduction every year. Fuel-switching and electrification deliver step changes mid-decade; the years in between are carried by efficiency. A measured 2–5% fuel saving from heat-loss elimination is one full year of SBTi-pace reduction, bookable now, cash-positive at €77.4/t carbon plus fuel.
