Earlier this year, TotalEnergies, a major European oil company, faced a court case over claims it made about being ‘carbon-neutral.’ The company promoted its environmental strategy as aligned with the Paris Agreement. However, environmental groups pushed back, arguing that these claims lacked a serious, actionable plan.
In a groundbreaking ruling, the French court found that some of TotalEnergies’ net-zero assertions were misleading. The company was ordered to remove the questionable material and pay a fine.
This case highlights a bigger issue: large corporations are now central to climate accountability. Many top companies generate emissions that rival or even exceed those of entire countries.
To truly meet the Paris Agreement goals, we can’t just monitor national commitments. We must also ensure that companies driving investment and production are genuinely on track.
This topic became even more relevant after the 30th United Nations Climate Conference (COP30) in Belém, Brazil, where nearly 200 countries discussed more rigorous climate action, including updated national targets and the pace of moving away from fossil fuels.
So, how do we hold these companies accountable? We need straightforward measurement tools that adapt to various sectors and business models. The risk lies in letting companies choose strategies that promote their agendas—this opens the door to greenwashing, where companies make grand claims without real evidence.
Academics can help by crafting transparent methods rooted in scientific research. One promising tool is the Carbon Budget Tracker, developed by researchers from institutions like UQ and Oxford University. It turns complex climate data into a practical tool for corporate benchmarking and is being tested by litigators and investors alike.
What sets the Carbon Budget Tracker apart is its approach: instead of merely assessing carbon intensity or emissions targets, it translates global climate scenarios into company-specific carbon budgets. It checks if a company’s past and future plans fit within those limits. In simple terms, it asks: how much carbon can a company emit while still keeping global warming to 1.5°C or 2°C, and is it adhering to that budget?
By focusing on these budgets, companies can’t hide problematic histories by cherry-picking favorable starting years. They also cannot just rely on metrics that measure intensity while total emissions rise. The tool lays bare the assumptions behind a company’s climate strategy—such as whether it depends on technologies like carbon capture that may not develop in time.
As pressure mounts on companies to contribute to climate solutions, without measurable goals, that pressure can become mere noise.
To foster ambition and accountability that withstands scrutiny from investors and the public, we need reliable metrics. Tools like the Carbon Budget Tracker help ensure that corporate climate commitments are not just easy to make but also hard to ignore.
