Supercritical

o
r
e
z
t
Ne me
i
t
a
in
n
o
i
s
s
e
c
e
r
of
ford
f
a
t
o
n
an
c
s
r
e
d
a
on
i
t
c
a
Why le
e
t
a
m
i
l
c
f
f
o
to put2SUPERCRITICAL|NET ZERO IN A TIME OF RECESSION

Contents
Introduction

3

The business casefor net zero

6

Four challenges
for leaders

13

A credible pathway
to net zero16

4 simple steps to net zerothat you can take today		 22Contact24

3SUPERCRITICAL|NET ZERO IN A TIME OF RECESSION

Introduction

4SUPERCRITICAL|NET ZERO IN A TIME OF RECESSION

Climate change is the defining challenge
for this generation, and innovative businesses
play a key role in fighting it.
Working with companies at the forefront of
this movement, it has been inspiring to see
how seriously leaders take their responsibilities.
When we survey our customers, theoverwhelming majority say they work withus because they have a moral obligation to
reduce their emissions.
But as we enter a period of profound economic
unrest, there is a risk that the big picture
gets forgotten. With the cost of living crisis
and a looming recession, many businesses
Michelle You

have assumed that economic challenges

Co-founder & CEO

must be prioritised—and climate concerns

Supercritical

can therefore wait.
Yet there is little evidence the current economic
situation has dampened public support foraction on climate issues. In fact, a recent
study found that 66% of citizens believe net
zero policies will help the UK become energy
independent faster—ultimately helping avoid
similar economic crises in the future.1
We undertook a large-scale survey of ourown to discover exactly how employees feel
about their organisations’ climate policies—
and whether they really do want employers
to de-prioritise climate issues. The answer
was a resounding ‘no’.
In this report, we present those results andexplore the challenges and benefits of net zeroin an uncertain economic climate - as well as
how leaders can get there. We have put thereport together for the many who don't consider
themselves to be ‘climate experts’. If we are to
be successful in our fight, it’s the actions of themany that will make the difference.

1. More In Common

5SUPERCRITICAL|NET ZERO IN A TIME OF RECESSION

Net zero is the
new DEI
Ten years ago, ‘diversity’
was little more than abuzzword. Few companies
had truly substantive Diversity,
Equity and Inclusion (DEI)
policies in place, and fewer
still could claim to have done
everything in their power totruly embrace diversity.

some going all the way back to 2005.4 Failure
to act on its climate risk may similarly return tohaunt businesses far into the future—and do
more than merely inflict reputational damage.

What is net zero?
Put simply, reaching net zero meansthat the total greenhouse gas emissions
a particular entity is responsible for are
zero: their activities do not result in a net

That is where net zero is today: whilemost recognise the concept, vanishingly few
leaders have truly reckoned with what it means
for their business. Many companies are stillin denial, believing they can just keep kicking
the environmental can down the street. While
reports find that up to 78% of companies haveincrease in the volume of greenhousegases in the atmosphere.
Achieving net zero has two components:
reduction (reducing your carbon footprint
going forward) and removal (purchasing
permanent carbon removal for thesome form of sustainability strategy, fewer thanemissions you are unable to reduce).

10% outline how they will reduce their carbon

While the concept has been aroundemissions2—and 64% of companies have nonet zero plan at all. 3

paradigm for climate action in recent

But just as DEI is now a central concern
for most successful organisations, net zero
will inevitably go from a ‘nice to have’ to an‘organisational essential’ faster than many
leaders realise.
Few people would forgive companies for
putting off DEI because of Brexit or the
pandemic, just as few in the future will accept
the cost of living crisis as an excuse for not
acting on net zero. Goldman Sachs currently
faces multiple gender discrimination lawsuits—

2. Consultancy

3. Telegraphfor years, it has become the dominant

4. Bloomberg

5. Gov UK

years. The UK was the first country tocreate a legal commitment to reach net
zero emissions by 20505; the majority
of countries have followed, either with
their own laws, policy documents or
public pledges.6
This has created a huge increase inpublic awareness, and placed pressure
on companies to act now. But realisingthese ambitious goals has put leaders
in a challenging position.

6. Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit

6

SUPERCRITICAL|NET ZERO IN A TIME OF RECESSION

The businesscase for net zero
Leaders cannot afford
to de-prioritise net zero

7SUPERCRITICAL|NET ZERO IN A TIME OF RECESSION

False narratives

As energy prices surge anda recession looms, the climate
has been dislodged as themost urgent political priority.
Many media outlets have taken the opportunity
to rail against net zero, blaming decarbonisation
policies for the crisis,7 questioning the scaleof these efforts8 and even claiming that theydisproportionately impact poorer households. 9
In fact, the research shows that the current
level of inflation can actually be blamed in parton decisions to slow decarbonisation efforts
and scrap climate policies. This includes cuttingenergy-efficiency subsidies and scrapping
the zero-carbon homes standard. Analysis
suggests energy bills are nearly £2.5 billion
as a result.10

The public still
support net zero
The cost of living crisis may
in fact be driving more support
for net zero policies.
66% of UK citizens believe net zero policies
will help the country become energy
independent faster and be less sensitive tosimilar shocks in the future.11 In another recent
poll, both millennials and Gen Z ranked climatechange as their second priority behind thecost of living.12 In our research, 32% of
employees said they were not comfortablewith their company cutting its sustainability
budget to save money—and 35% said theywould consider leaving their current employers
if it took no action to reduce carbon emissions.
The reason is simple: net zero and the costof living crisis are not at odds with one another.
Indeed, they are complementary: modelling
carried out by Cambridge Econometrics has
demonstrated that tackling the cost of living
while simultaneously accelerating the UK’s
low-carbon transition would create ‘win-wins’.
It could lead to lower bills now, a stronger
economy later and a healthier environment
in the long-term.13

7. Net Zero Watch

8. GWPF

9. Telegraph

10. Economics Observatory

11. More In Common

12. Deloitte

13. Corporate Leader Group8

SUPERCRITICAL|NET ZERO IN A TIME OF RECESSION

Five reasons leaders should embrace
net zero during times of uncertainty...

1

Access top talent
As climate change
awareness grows, workers
expect their employers to
be more amibitious.

A win-win for businesses
57% of employees currently say that theirorganisation is not doing enough to involve
them in cutting their carbon emissions.18 Our
own research found that 26% feel dissatisfied
with the opportunities they are given toSome companies we’ve worked with reportshare feedback on their employers’ climatethat this is among their team’s top priorities:

action—while 21% say they are not given any

one Supercritical client recently surveyed theiropportunities at all.

employees, and 55% of their team claimed

This is crying out for collaboration: not onlythat they would only work at a company withwill employees be happier at companies

a clear net zero strategy.

that take stronger climate action, but they
are keen to actively contribute—making it

Top talent rewards climate action

easier and cheaper to make enduring,

Studies have found that 62% of workers would

sustainable changes.

be more likely to move to a company that has
committed to environmental causes14; that
40% would be more likely to stay at a company
with a net zero strategy15; and that 71% of all
employees and employment seekers now findenvironmentally sustainable companies more
attractive.16 One survey even found that 51% ofyoung people would accept lower pay if they
believed their employer was environmentally
responsible.17
their own bills. But they also want theiremployer to reduce and remove their carbon

of employees say that
their organisation is notdoing enough to involve
them in cutting theircarbon emissions

footprint. Not only that: employees want to be
actively involved in those efforts.

15. Infogrid research

16. IBM

17. New York Timesof workers would be more
likely to move to a company
that has committed toenvironmental causes

57%

Of course, most people’s priority is covering

14. Morgan Lovell

62%

18. Positive Planet

9

SUPERCRITICAL

2|

NET ZERO IN A TIME OF RECESSION

Securing
investment

environmental responsibilities as soon as
economic conditions worsen.
Some founders dismiss this as rhetoric; theymight cite recent research showing that just 7%of VC funded startups have a net zero strategy,
and just 11% actively measure their emissions.21

As we enter a period of
economic uncertainty,
leaders should ensure they
have access to the widest
possible pool of investors. But
we are already seeing thatenvironmental credentials playa big role in who gets funding.

But this fails to learn the lessons of DEI.
The world of investing
can shift extremely quickly
In a very short period, DEI went from a‘nice to have’ to a non-negotiable essential.
Considering that 77% of institutional investors
in Europe expect to stop buying productsthat do not align with their ESG goals,22 it isfair to assume early-stage investors too willsoon be taking a much tougher tone on net
zero and carbon emissions.
We are already seeing this with the EU’s

ESG investing is the new normal
More than 70% of leaders already say pressure
from investors is compelling them to focus
more on sustainability.19 Studies show that 85%
of firms consider Environmental, Social andGovernance (ESG) factors in their investment
decisions,20 and startups should expect properdue diligence from prospective investors.
This makes sense: investors are generally
looking for companies with long-term
potential. Those that demonstrate a lackof commitment to environmental concerns
likely signal poor judgement or a lack of longterm vision—especially if they shirk their

Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation(SFDR). This forces asset managers to reveal
differing levels of sustainability integration,
providing clear metrics for investors tounderstand the environmental and social
impact of different companies in which theymight invest.
‘Article 6’ funds, for example, will include
stocks excluded by Environment, Social andGovernance (ESG) funds—things like tobaccocompanies and coal producers. Investors will
likely steer clear of such funds, in favour of funds
that qualify as ‘Article 8’ or ‘Article 9’—both ofwhich are environmentally and socially friendly.

As an investor, we have a role to play in the climate fight by supporting
our portfolio companies to reduce their carbon footprint. We are excitedwhen companies reduce their climate impact and share our passion for
doing so as they help us as the investor meet our climate goals.
Kate Bingham DBE, Managing Partner, SV Health Investors

19. WeForum

20. Gartner research

21. ESG_VC

22. PwC

103SUPERCRITICAL|NET ZERO IN A TIME OF RECESSION

Driving revenue

When comparing similar
products, sustainability is astrong differentiator and canunquestionably tip things inyour favour.
A recent Deloitte survey found that 43% ofconsumers actively choose brands based on

43%

of consumers say they actively choose brands
based on their environmental commitment

their environmental impact, and over a thirdof consumers say having a socially responsible
supply chain is important to gain their trust.23

However, nearly half of all
to provide data on emissions and have net
consumers say they don’t
zero plans in place. Today, all NHS procurementknow what commitments
decisions include a net zero and social value
weighting; companies that want to become
businesses have made with
suppliers must prove they are taking action
on climate change. From April 2023,
regard to climate change
Many B2B businesses will already be findingthat their customers require their suppliers

25

suppliers on contracts over £5 million will

have to publish carbon reduction plans. By
2030, suppliers will only qualify for NHS
contracts if they can clearly demonstrate theirprogress on climate issues.24

This knowledge gap is crucial: research fromPwC has found that just 56% of consumers
are even aware of net zero, but when it isexplained to them, 80% are passionate about
reducing emissions.26
The lesson is clear: companies should takeit upon themselves to not only commit to net
zero, but help educate their consumers about
what that means and why it matters. This
will build trust and loyalty from consumers.
If the numerous studies about consumers’
preference for sustainability are to be believed,
it should help drive a big increase in revenue, too.

23. Deloitte

24. NHS25. Deloitte

26. PwC

114SUPERCRITICAL|NET ZERO IN A TIME OF RECESSION

Incoming regulation

Environmental regulations
will become more of anissue in the coming years.
This will make net zero efforts
more than just a commercial
or ethical necessity—it
will make them a matterof legal compliance.

Soon enough, the majority of organisations willfind they have legal obligations to demonstrate
their climate commitments. Companies thattake net zero seriously today will have an easiertime with regulation when it inevitably arrives.
This is particularly important for early-stage
businesses: the cost of changing environmental
policies, overhauling supply chains andfundamentally altering operations will only growover time.
Take pre-emptive action

Many organisations are already feeling thisA huge number of voluntary initiatives

Based on recommendations from the Taskforce

have taken off in recent years, such as theon Climate-related Financial Disclosures(TCFD), climate-related financial disclosures
are now mandatory for over 1,300 of the UK’s
largest organisations. There is also a roadmap
in place to expand this regulation to a wider
range of companies in the coming years.27

27. Gov UK

Race To Net Zero, Transform to Net Zeroand Tech Zero which are being led by techbusinesses in the UK. These programs havebeen embraced by companies across theglobe as a way of self-imposing pressure
to take net zero more seriously.

125SUPERCRITICAL|NET ZERO IN A TIME OF RECESSION

Establish futurecredibility
The reality is companies
that do not take control of
their emissions will pay the
cost—either in future expenses
or obsolescence.
Even if they do eventually take accountability
for their emissions, they may end up losing
credibility, appearing to simply be following
the trend or ticking a box.
The risks of inaction may include losing
employees to more forward-thinking companies;
missing contracts to companies that are able
to more clearly demonstrate their climate
credentials; and struggling to access funding
from wary investors.
This is where the parallel with DEI is clearest
Companies that were slow to act on DEI
are still suffering as a consequence—even
when they have made efforts to address the
problem. Whether it’s Abercrombie and Fitch
or Goldman Sachs, the perception that DEI
was embraced for the wrong reasons can do
significant damage to a company’s reputation.
The same will be expected of net zero policies.
Leaders should therefore consider net zeroan important investment towards their future
reputation. 63% of executives believe theircompany is leading on climate change.28 But
it is only those that are able to back thosebeliefs up with data and action that will actually
be seen as leaders.

28. WeForum13

SUPERCRITICAL|NET ZERO IN A TIME OF RECESSION

Four challenges
for leaders
Why enacting net zero policies
proves so difficult

14SUPERCRITICAL|NET ZERO IN A TIME OF RECESSION

1

2Time andcomplexity

Cost
concerns

You know climate change

You want to invest resources

matters, are frustrated at its

into becoming moreslow progress, but how do you

sustainable, but how cankeep up with the research while your business make theLeaders don’t want to invest
large sums of money in efforts
that may not produce results
Leaders often suspect reaching net

running a business?

transition affordable?

zero will blow up their budget. ThisThe climate crisis is complex andReaching net zero requires mostreaching net zero will cost $3.5

ever-evolving; the latest IPCC

companies to radically rethink how

trillion each year, 32 as well as an

climate report was based on 14,000+

they operate, scrutinising their Scopeawareness that companies offering

academic papers. 29

1, 2 and 3 suppliers, as well making

climate-friendly solutions are able toa range of alterations to their dailycharge a premium for their services.

behaviour and accessing innovative

As a side note it should also be said

carbon capture methods. It is hardthat these reports fail to consider how

to know how to budget for thismuch inaction on climate change

especially when you are not clear on

would cost.

Two-thirds of small businessleaders are worried they don’t
have the right skills or knowledge
to tackle climate change30
Even those with sufficient climate
knowledge would have to dedicate
themselves full-time to digesting
all of the relevant information, andinaccurate media reporting is often
buffered by errors and oversights
on the part of researchers. 31
This is a source of frustration forwhat your carbon footprint looks like.

Without confidence, leaders are reluctant

Many companies create sustainability

to put a proper budget aside. And

committees to tackle these problems.

without a proper budget, little can be

In many cases the individuals on

done to make a real difference.

those teams generally don’t havedomain specific expertise—so they
still lack clarity on the cost or expected
impact of any given initiative.

leaders: they understand how
important net zero is and genuinely
want to ‘leave no trace’. However,
without a proper understandingof the challenge and clear direction
on the path forward, it’s difficult forthem to commit to a programme.

29. The Conversation

is probably driven by reports that

30. SMEClimateHub 31. LSE

32. World Economic Forum15

SUPERCRITICAL|NET ZERO IN A TIME OF RECESSION

3

4

Carbonaccounting

Accountability
vacuumVisibility of your emissions
and decarbonisation efforts
are essential. So the obvious
question is, where do you
begin accounting for your fullcarbon footprint?
Most businesses don’t havethe time or in-house expertise toaccurately map their emissions.
This can lead to inconsistent
data collection or a lack ofunderstanding about suppliers’
emissions. Without access to
the right data set, it is virtually
impossible to produce aneffective strategy for reaching
net zero.
This is a problem for organisationsof all sizes. A recent review
looked at the net zero pledgesof 25 top global companies,
including Amazon and Google.
It found that the changes thesecompanies had committed
to would add up to an average
40% reduction in emissions.
This would mean 60% ofemissions would need to becovered by carbon removal—
which is just not realistic. 33
Such failures are driven by a lackof knowledge and transparency
about their emissions. Many
only measure Scope 1 and2 emissions, leaving out their

33. Reuters

34. Financial Times

supply chain’s emissions(which fall into their Scope 3.
For context, Scope 3 emissions
can to between 80–95% ofmany companies’ emissions.
Too many leaders thinkthey can put off theircarbon accounting
Most companies are still
operating on intuition withregards to their climate impact,
but those intuitions can easily
lead them astray. 57% ofcompanies that haven’t madea net zero pledge believe
they simply don’t emit muchcarbon34—but without properaccounting, how can theyknow that?
Even many of those that havemade net zero pledges haven’t
done robust carbon accounting.
Only 35% of UK-based businesses
with net zero targets have collected
their emissions baseline data andare prepared to measure theiremissions going forward, while
just 12% have had their net zeroplans verified by a third party.

Net zero requires
accountability and leadership.
But how can organisations
ensure their people takeownership of the problem?
Net zero requires organisationalchange, and that requires
accountability. When nobody
knows who is responsible forinternal climate policies or ensuring
those policies are enacted, inertia
is likely to kick in.
Leaders often don’t have thetime to dedicate themselves tothese tasks—even if they would
like to. However with multiple
stakeholders affected by policies
related to net zero, it is easy
for responsibility to be diluted
throughout the team.
Even in businesses that do havea sustainability team, it tends tobe a ‘second job’
This is especially true in growing
businesses and startups; thefluidity of the culture and speedof change makes it easy forclimate action to slip throughthe cracks while leaders are busy
putting out fires elsewhere. Many
teams try to unite around thecause. Without a single seniorleader in charge of the problem,
action often fails to materialise.

16SUPERCRITICAL|NET ZERO IN A TIME OF RECESSION

A credible
pathway
to net zero
What it means to truly
reach net zero

17

SUPERCRITICAL|NET ZERO IN A TIME OF RECESSION

Net zero is a surprisingly controversial topic. There isa lack of consensus around the definition of net zero as
well as the standards that govern it. There is also some
controversy around offsetting: some claim that it is simply
an ‘accounting trick’ that allows businesses to continue
polluting without consequence.
They have a point: with pressure mounting

At its root, the problem is a misapprehension

to reduce emissions, a huge number ofabout what achieving net zero really means.

companies have turned to carbon offsetting

Busy leaders rarely have the time to properly

as a quick fix. The idea is to invest in projects

vet them—meaning they end up increasing

which reduce emissions by installing renewable

their overall emissions. Whether it’s using

energy and protect from deforestation. But

avoidance offsets; the wrong removal offsets;

carbon offsetting allows companies to continue

or simply becoming over-reliant on offsets asincreasing their emissions whilst appearinga means to achieve net zero, many companies

to ‘go green’.

are at serious risk of greenwashing without

Companies like Arla in
Sweden and BNY Melon
have been taken to court
for making unsubtantiatedgreen claims

even realising it.

35, 36The market for carbon offsetting has reached$100 billion, but it is filled with flawed or
downright fraudulent companies looking totake advantage of business’s desire for a way
to avoid making difficult operational changes
that would actually reduce their emissions. 37

So how do you avoid investing in thewrong methods or the wrong people?

35. Financial Times

36. Food Manufacture

37. Bloomberg

18SUPERCRITICAL|NET ZERO IN A TIME OF RECESSION

The greenhouse gas protocol

Tackling a complex large scale
problem like climate change
requires a unified, consistentsystem of measurement—
and clear rules about how
to account for emissions.

Many leaders find this tough to swallow

This is why the Greenhouse Gas Protocol

Ultimately, the GHG Protocol is the best system

is so important: it provides a single global

we have; it provides the only realistic andstandard for what should be included in carbon

credible pathway to net zero. While inevitably

accounting. This means different companies

imperfect, it provides a consistent, unified

in different countries are all held to the same

method for all companies to be held to thestandards and can defer to an impartial bodysame standards—and work together to reachwhen making sense of their situation.

our goals.

The system isn’t flawless thoughSome find the terminology confusing—even
the concept of Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions
can be unclear to some. They also feel thatthe accounting method is unduly negative;
even when they make savings by, for example,
switching to wind turbines, the GHG Protocol
still demands that they include the emissions
associated with this new energy source—
including the steel used to make the turbines
and the energy used to transport it.
There are frustrations about the imprecisionof accounting for Scope 3 emissions, too. The
GHG Protocol dictates that companies accountfor every stakeholder in their supply chain. Thismeans the same emissions might be counted
by numerous different companies—multiplying
the volume of emissions being counted overall.

They have to count emissions which are alsocounted by other companies. It seems unfair,
as if the rules of carbon accounting are rigged
against them. The harsh reality is, this is the
only way to ensure all emissions do get properly
accounted for—and the effects on individualorganisations are actually extremely small.

19SUPERCRITICAL|NET ZERO IN A TIME OF RECESSION

Everything must be accounted for(but make it material)

The biggest shock leaders
face when starting their
net zero journey is realisingquite how widespread theiremissions are.
The entire supply chain must be included inyour carbon accounting, including activities
which most people don’t instinctively associatewith environmental harm.
If people work from home, their electricity
usage counts; if you have a leaky air
conditioning unit, that will also contributeto your emissions. From the consultants you
work with to the food you serve in the canteen,
every single part of the value chain has tobe accounted for—these ‘hidden’ emission
sources have a surprisingly large impact.

Accounting for all of this can be overwhelming;
you start to get why so many companies
have been tempted into falsifying their data.
But there is no way around this, and it’s betterto swallow the bitter pill now than later.

At Supercritical, we
see tech customers
with simple supply chains
surprised by their total
emissions when theyaccount for Google
or Facebook ad spend

20SUPERCRITICAL|NET ZERO IN A TIME OF RECESSION

Reduction is not enough

Reaching net zero purely
by reducing emissions
is unrealistic; the vast
majority of businesses are
simply unable to operate
without generating any
emissions at some pointin their supply chain.

Carbon removal is essential forstabilising climate at 1.5°C warming
On the planetary level, we will need toreduce our current emissions by about
85%, but to achieve net zero we will
also need to develop technologies thatwill be able to remove about a sixth of ourcurrent emissions. These removal methods
require investment and innovation—
providing an opportunity for businesses
to prove themselves as early adopters.

This is why carbon removal is so important:by developing the means to remove carbon
from the atmosphere, we are able to remove
any business-critical emissions and mitigate
the worst effects of climate change.

For years, dissenters argued that thesemethods would never be able to scale fastenough. However, in the 18 months or so,
radical breakthroughs have made them not justplausible but essential to a comprehensive
net zero strategy.
As new technology and methods emerge,
being able to identify and adopt them will bea key strategic skill for organisations that wantto achieve net zero faster and cheaper.

1/6

carbon removal will likely make up around
1/6 of the total efforts required to mitigate themost severe consequences of climate change

21SUPERCRITICAL|NET ZERO IN A TIME OF RECESSION

Here are three common methods
from a fast expanding list...

This method utilises biogenic waste material—such as bark,sawdust or agricultural byproducts like husks. These materials
are heated up in the absence of oxygen, which turns it intoa charcoal material called biochar. Biochar can then be spread

Biocharon land as soil enhancer, helping to improve the fertility, water
retention as well as reduce nitrous oxide emissions from soils.
Doing this locks CO2 out of the short carbon cycle. Biochar
processing facilities are increasingly common near to sourcesof biogenic waste, like lumber mills or rice processing factories.
It is one of the cheaper carbon removal methods; companies
such as Microsoft have invested heavily in using it.

As trees grow, they perform photosynthesis to create energy.
When they do this, they essentially breathe in CO2 from the air.
Planting trees therefore offers a fantastic means of absorbing
carbon from the atmosphere.

Planting
trees

It is important to note that this only counts as carbon removal
if you are planting totally new trees—not replacing those thathave been felled. And because we cannot guarantee the trees
will be there in ten years’ time—they may die of disease, or becaught in a fire—planting trees is not considered a particularlyrobust carbon removal method and should not count towards
making a net zero claim as the emissions are likely to outlive thecarbon stored in the tree.

Direct air capture (DAC) employs a machine which blows out
air and draws out CO2 from the air. The result is a tank of pureDirect air
captureCO2 that has been extracted from the air. This is then liquified
and injected underground—where it stays.
This ultimately removes CO2 from the atmosphere. However,it requires advanced machinery, plenty of renewable energy
and a safe place to store it. This makes it quite expensive, though
there is currently a lot of investment in bigger plants that will
enable the process to become more efficient over time.

22SUPERCRITICAL|NET ZERO IN A TIME OF RECESSION

4 simple steps
to net zerothat you cantake today23SUPERCRITICAL

1|

NET ZERO IN A TIME OF RECESSION

Set abudget2

The single most important way
businesses can accelerate their net
zero journey is setting aside a budget
for carbon reduction and removal efforts.
This will help guarantee accountability;
the business is committed, and you
have full visibility of the costs associatedwith your environmental efforts.

Involve yourwhole teamWe’ve already discussed the benefits
that employers can see as a resultof reaching net zero. It’s also important
to note that getting your whole teambehind the cause can help make it far
more manageable both economicallyand in terms of time. Often, what
this looks like in practice is forminga sustainability committee to takeownership of these issues.

We have found that a budget of
between £400 and £600 per employee
per year is what most companies need,though this will vary depending on thespecific organisation.

Leaders often shudder at the prospectof kicking off their carbon accounting
efforts, assuming it will be a mammoth
undertaking. The reality is, with the rightpeople involved, we have found thatmost businesses can provide all thedata required for comprehensive carbon
accounting in the space of a few hours.

We’ve created a team of Sustainability Champions. Sharing
the responsibility has democratised the ‘top down’ decisionmaking and empowered everyone to ensure all teams and levels
throughout the business have sustainability top of their agenda.
Oliver Sidwell, Co-Founder, RMP Enterprise

3

Focus onalternatives
Many businesses can gain easy
environmental wins by making smallchanges to their procurement andoperations. A few examples include
flights, food and meetings.
Business flights produce three times more
emissions than economy flights—as wellas costing more. From an environmental
and an economic perspective, thisis a huge win-win. Similarly, serving
exclusively vegan or vegetarian meals in
the workspace will often have a material
impact on your footprint; as will opting
for video calls when possible, to reduce
unnecessary use of transport.

4

Buy removal throughexpert partners
Most carbon removal technology is stillin its infancy, which means it is generally
very expensive. However, using an expert
partner like Supercritical can massively
reduce these burdens. We provide expert
advice, reducing the risk of you wastingmoney on bad offsets and ensuring you
obtain the most cutting-edge, best value
offsets possible.
With Supercritical, you also receive
support across a range of related areas,
including internal communications,carbon accounting and research. This
simplifies the process, as well as saving
time, energy and money.

Contact
Please get in touch if
you have any questions:
Michelle You
Co-founder & CEO
michelle.you@gosupercritical.com
gosupercritical.com

Supercritical