StarZero All shows Try the podcast clipper →

Nov 16, 2022 · 23m · green-blueprint

A reality check on corporate sustainability

Joel Makower · 9m spoken Stephen Lacey · 7m spoken Sinduja Rangarajan · 4m spoken
0:00 / 0:00

gold bands on the timeline = statements, start to end. Hover to read, click to jump. CC turns on captions

This episode of The Carbon Copy critically examines corporate climate commitments, exposing how paper accounting tools like Renewable Energy Certificates mask emissions while evaluating the systemic changes, emerging technologies, and governance reforms required for genuine decarbonization.

How this conversation actually went

Every chapter scored 0–10 on four independent dynamics. Hover any point for the reasoning behind the score. How this is scored →

The hosts as informed peer 5.8 Guest teaching 4.3 Guest disagreement 1.5 The hosts pushing back 1.0
05100:0010:0020:000:02–3:18 · The hosts as informed peer 5/10 Investigating Corporate Emissions Discrepancies and RECs Host Stephen Lacey introduces Sinduja Rangarajan's data investigation into corporate climate accounting, clearly understanding the difference between location-based and market-based accounting. Rangarajan provides novel empirical data showing a 112-million-metric-ton discrepancy across thousands of corporate filings.3:28–9:03 · The hosts as informed peer 7/10 Unpacking Scope Two Emissions and Renewable Energy Credits Lacey demonstrates significant domain knowledge by detailing Scopes 1, 2, and 3 emissions and citing a Nature Climate Change study on science-based targets. Rangarajan illustrates this by presenting specific corporate examples like Cisco and Procter & Gamble.9:07–16:37 · The hosts as informed peer 6/10 Corporate Clean Energy Progress and Introduction of Joel Makower Lacey cites concrete statistics on corporate PPAs and hourly matching, but Joel Makower counters the optimistic narrative by labeling the trend 'radical incrementalism'. Lacey follows up by asking Makower to pinpoint the specific internal mechanisms driving corporate inertia.16:38–22:15 · The hosts as informed peer 5/10 Evaluating Climate Risk Disclosures and Emerging Technologies Lacey introduces regulatory disclosure sticks and new technological advancements, while Makower moderates expectations about SEC disclosure rules serving merely as a compliance floor. The exchange remains collaborative and focused on emerging climate solutions.0:02–3:18 · Guest teaching 4/10 Investigating Corporate Emissions Discrepancies and RECs Host Stephen Lacey introduces Sinduja Rangarajan's data investigation into corporate climate accounting, clearly understanding the difference between location-based and market-based accounting. Rangarajan provides novel empirical data showing a 112-million-metric-ton discrepancy across thousands of corporate filings.3:28–9:03 · Guest teaching 4/10 Unpacking Scope Two Emissions and Renewable Energy Credits Lacey demonstrates significant domain knowledge by detailing Scopes 1, 2, and 3 emissions and citing a Nature Climate Change study on science-based targets. Rangarajan illustrates this by presenting specific corporate examples like Cisco and Procter & Gamble.9:07–16:37 · Guest teaching 5/10 Corporate Clean Energy Progress and Introduction of Joel Makower Lacey cites concrete statistics on corporate PPAs and hourly matching, but Joel Makower counters the optimistic narrative by labeling the trend 'radical incrementalism'. Lacey follows up by asking Makower to pinpoint the specific internal mechanisms driving corporate inertia.16:38–22:15 · Guest teaching 4/10 Evaluating Climate Risk Disclosures and Emerging Technologies Lacey introduces regulatory disclosure sticks and new technological advancements, while Makower moderates expectations about SEC disclosure rules serving merely as a compliance floor. The exchange remains collaborative and focused on emerging climate solutions.0:02–3:18 · Guest disagreement 0/10 Investigating Corporate Emissions Discrepancies and RECs Host Stephen Lacey introduces Sinduja Rangarajan's data investigation into corporate climate accounting, clearly understanding the difference between location-based and market-based accounting. Rangarajan provides novel empirical data showing a 112-million-metric-ton discrepancy across thousands of corporate filings.3:28–9:03 · Guest disagreement 1/10 Unpacking Scope Two Emissions and Renewable Energy Credits Lacey demonstrates significant domain knowledge by detailing Scopes 1, 2, and 3 emissions and citing a Nature Climate Change study on science-based targets. Rangarajan illustrates this by presenting specific corporate examples like Cisco and Procter & Gamble.9:07–16:37 · Guest disagreement 3/10 Corporate Clean Energy Progress and Introduction of Joel Makower Lacey cites concrete statistics on corporate PPAs and hourly matching, but Joel Makower counters the optimistic narrative by labeling the trend 'radical incrementalism'. Lacey follows up by asking Makower to pinpoint the specific internal mechanisms driving corporate inertia.16:38–22:15 · Guest disagreement 2/10 Evaluating Climate Risk Disclosures and Emerging Technologies Lacey introduces regulatory disclosure sticks and new technological advancements, while Makower moderates expectations about SEC disclosure rules serving merely as a compliance floor. The exchange remains collaborative and focused on emerging climate solutions.0:02–3:18 · The hosts pushing back 0/10 Investigating Corporate Emissions Discrepancies and RECs Host Stephen Lacey introduces Sinduja Rangarajan's data investigation into corporate climate accounting, clearly understanding the difference between location-based and market-based accounting. Rangarajan provides novel empirical data showing a 112-million-metric-ton discrepancy across thousands of corporate filings.3:28–9:03 · The hosts pushing back 1/10 Unpacking Scope Two Emissions and Renewable Energy Credits Lacey demonstrates significant domain knowledge by detailing Scopes 1, 2, and 3 emissions and citing a Nature Climate Change study on science-based targets. Rangarajan illustrates this by presenting specific corporate examples like Cisco and Procter & Gamble.9:07–16:37 · The hosts pushing back 2/10 Corporate Clean Energy Progress and Introduction of Joel Makower Lacey cites concrete statistics on corporate PPAs and hourly matching, but Joel Makower counters the optimistic narrative by labeling the trend 'radical incrementalism'. Lacey follows up by asking Makower to pinpoint the specific internal mechanisms driving corporate inertia.16:38–22:15 · The hosts pushing back 1/10 Evaluating Climate Risk Disclosures and Emerging Technologies Lacey introduces regulatory disclosure sticks and new technological advancements, while Makower moderates expectations about SEC disclosure rules serving merely as a compliance floor. The exchange remains collaborative and focused on emerging climate solutions.

speaking balance: gold is the hosts, purple is the guest (3 minute bins)

0:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%0:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%3:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%3:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%6:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%6:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%9:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%9:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%12:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%12:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%15:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%15:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%18:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%18:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%21:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%21:00 · the hosts 0% · guest 100%
Sharpest disagreement ▶ 10:48 Makower rejects the corporate progress narrative

Makower directly counters the host's optimistic examples, dismissing broader corporate sustainability efforts as 'radical incrementalism' that fails to meet the scale of the climate crisis.

 Hardest push from the hosts ▶ 13:50 Host presses on specific causes of corporate inertia

Lacey challenges Makower's broad skepticism by contrasting it with front-runner corporates and demanding specific evidence of why middle-market companies fail to act.

 Biggest teaching moment ▶ 1:54 Rangarajan reveals massive corporate emissions gap

Rangarajan details findings from over 8,000 corporate filings, revealing a 112-million-ton reporting gap equivalent to 24 million gasoline vehicles.

 The host holds their own ▶ 5:00 Host cites Nature Climate Change study on RECs

Lacey showcases strong command of literature, citing specific data from Nature Climate Change showing 42 percent of corporate emissions cuts rely on ineffective RECs.
the scores for every segment, with the reasoning behind each
ChapterTopicThe hosts as informed peerGuest teachingGuest disagreementThe hosts pushing backWhy
Investigating Corporate Emissions Discrepancies and RECs 5400 Host Stephen Lacey introduces Sinduja Rangarajan's data investigation into corporate climate accounting, clearly understanding the difference between location-based and market-based accounting. Rangarajan provides novel empirical data showing a 112-million-metric-ton discrepancy across thousands of corporate filings.
Unpacking Scope Two Emissions and Renewable Energy Credits 7411 Lacey demonstrates significant domain knowledge by detailing Scopes 1, 2, and 3 emissions and citing a Nature Climate Change study on science-based targets. Rangarajan illustrates this by presenting specific corporate examples like Cisco and Procter & Gamble.
Corporate Clean Energy Progress and Introduction of Joel Makower 6532 Lacey cites concrete statistics on corporate PPAs and hourly matching, but Joel Makower counters the optimistic narrative by labeling the trend 'radical incrementalism'. Lacey follows up by asking Makower to pinpoint the specific internal mechanisms driving corporate inertia.
Evaluating Climate Risk Disclosures and Emerging Technologies 5421 Lacey introduces regulatory disclosure sticks and new technological advancements, while Makower moderates expectations about SEC disclosure rules serving merely as a compliance floor. The exchange remains collaborative and focused on emerging climate solutions.

Statements from this episode (10)

Assertion Supported
Rangarajan: 1,318 Companies Had 112M Metric Ton CO2 Reporting Gap in 2020
“And we found that, you know in, in 2020, A 1318 companies had a difference of hundred and twelve million metric tons CO₂ between their location and their market-based emissions.”
Sinduja Rangarajan Nov 16, 2022 ▶ 2:09
Assertion Supported
Lacey: Major Corporations Like Intel and Starbucks Rely on RECs for Climate Claims
“Intel, Pepsi, Starbucks, Procter & Gamble, thousands of the world's biggest companies rely on renewable energy credits to make sustainability claims.”
Stephen Lacey Nov 16, 2022 ▶ 2:33
Assertion Supported
Lacey: Study finds 42% of corporate emissions targets fail real-world mitigation
“A study just published in the journal Nature Climate Change looked at a 115 companies with science-based targets. These are targets modeled after the Paris Climate Accord, and researchers found that 42% of planned emissions cuts from those companies will quote…”
Stephen Lacey Nov 16, 2022 ▶ 5:46
Assertion Supported
Rangarajan: Without RECs, Procter & Gamble's emissions drop was only 12%
“So, you know, we looked at so many companies, and, you know, for example, Procter & Gamble, you know, decided to claim that, you know, it slashed 50% of its emissions and then when you really look at, you know, how they got to that 50% reduction, then a lot of…”
Sinduja Rangarajan Nov 16, 2022 ▶ 6:26
Assertion Supported
Rangarajan: Without RECs, Cisco's emissions rose 22% instead of dropping 60%
“With Cisco, again, you know emissions reductions, and claims using a certain form of accounting would be 60%, but then when you actually remove the credits from the equation, then their emissions have actually gone up by 22%.”
Sinduja Rangarajan Nov 16, 2022 ▶ 6:53
Assertion Supported
Rangarajan: Intel's emissions rose 38% without renewable energy credits
“Another example that comes to mind is Intel where, you know, their emissions have actually gone up by 38%, but when you, like, calculate Using renewable energy credits, then it only goes up by, like, 17%.”
Sinduja Rangarajan Nov 16, 2022 ▶ 7:10
Assertion Supported
Corporate PPAs drove nearly 40% of US renewables since 2014
“Even when casting those wrecks aside, nearly 40% of renewable energy added to the U.S. Grid since 2014 came from corporate power purchase agreements. That's according to the Clean Energy Buyers Association.”
Stephen Lacey Nov 16, 2022 ▶ 9:36
Insight
Makower: Middle management is the impenetrable wad thwarting corporate sustainability
“It's that big, fat, impenetrable wad of resistance called middle management that's often thwarted. They're really adept at thwarting change.”
Joel Makower Nov 16, 2022 ▶ 12:32
Prediction Not checkable as stated
Makower: SEC climate disclosure rules will be satisfied with vague language
“I also think it's going to, in, in its practice, in the compliance of, with whatever the SEC ultimately comes back with, is going to be, With sufficient, not necessarily loopholes, but the ability to meet the requirements with a bunch of vague language that do…”
Joel Makower Nov 16, 2022 ▶ 17:25
Prediction Not checkable as stated
Makower: Supply chain contracts will enforce climate disclosures more than regulators
“I think there's a lot more, you know, in the task force for climate-related financial disclosures than now the task Of course, for nature-related financial disclosures, that a lot of those things, which will be enforced through contracts, supply, supplier rela…”
Joel Makower Nov 16, 2022 ▶ 18:56
Made with StarZero

Turn any episode into a week of clips.

This entire site, over 100 episodes transcribed, diarized, checked and made playable, runs on the StarZero media pipeline. Drop in your own episode and the podcast clipper finds the moments worth sharing, cuts them, captions them, and reframes them for every feed.

Try the podcast clipper Learn more