I have the following questions regarding the TR tool:
When populating the “target data” tab, what is the difference between ‘base year’ and ‘start year’?
When running the code and downloading the “data dump” Excel file. Companies with forward-looking targets (shown in the templates), are assigned a default score and the fields related to targets appear empty in Excel. What can be causing this?
We’ve run the code several times and we continuously get an S1S2S3 temperature score lower than the S1S2 portfolio score. This doesn’t make sense as the S3 portfolio score is the highest of all three and the current reporting and target-setting market behaviour. Can you please confirm whether this is a possible result?
Is it logical to get company temperature scores below 1.5°C?
Hi,
The base year is defined according to the GHG Protocol, i.e. “a performance
datum with which to compare current emissions.” The start year is the year the target was announced. The start year is optional.
I’ll look into 2 and 3 a bit closer.
4. Not really, we are implementing a temperature floor in the method and the tool which (preliminarily) will be 1.3 degrees which corresponds to the current temperature rise.
It has been almost two year since this post and there is still no temperature floor implemented in the method and the tool (question 4). Could you please let us know when are you planning to introduce the floor? What would the floor be? And can FIs manually add the floor in the meantime when getting their TR target approved by SBTi?
Hi Valeria,
In the tool version pointed to by the SBTi there is a feature for temperature floor. However, it has been set to 0.0. If you have the Python code locally then you can set the attribute in the module configs.py:
TEMPERATURE_FLOOR: float = 1.5, or whatever value you want.
However, if you are running the tool in Colab or some other notebook then it is theoretically possible to overwrite the module configs.py with the changed value of the temperature floor. But this isn’t a very good way of doing this modification.
As far as the method is concerned, CDP and WWF are working on an update that will soon (later in May) be released for public consultation. A new version of the tool will be released when the consultation has closed and the feedback has been analyzed. Please note that this update does not automatically mean that the SBTi will endorse the new version of the method.
Thank you so much for the fast reply and valuable insights. Our client is about to submit TR target to SBTi, what is official SBTi recommendation? Should the temperature floor be 0 or 1.5 when calculating the baseline temperature score?
With regards to the template, would very much appreciate if you could kindly provide some guidance to my questions below?
If the corporates have supplier engagement target for their scope 3, how can this be correctly captured in the input data template? Or is the engagement target given default score of 3.2?
As an input we provide corporate target for Scope 1+2 as one row. However, for scope 3, can the input be done solely for scope 3 target? OR do the targets need to be input in the format of scope 1+2+3?
Is there any significance of the base year scope 1,2,3 emissions and achieved reduction fields in the template? Does the input here affect the final result?
Hi Nikunj, referring to your list of questions:
1: As in v1.0 of the Temperature Rating method, only absolute and intensity targets are accepted, which means that an engagement target would get a default score.
2: It is ok to provide a row with just the scope 3 target. The tool calculates a temperature score for that target and then aggregates to a scope 1+2+3 score for the time frame in questions.
3: The base year is used in the calculation of the reduction rate which in turn is used in the linear regression calculation. So yes, it is very significant. And as far as achieved reduction is concerned, as long as it is <1.0 it doesn’t impact the calculations. However if it is 1.0 or greater the targets is seen as obsolete and thus invalid.
Hope that answers your questions.
/Peter