Tech groups score win on clean energy rules for gas-powered data centres
Corporate climate watchdog drops stricter proposal on net zero claims after heavy lobbying
Tech groups including Meta and Amazon will be able to claim gas-fuelled data centres are fully covered by their clean energy investments, after heavy pressure by lobby groups on top corporate climate watchdogs.
The Science Based Targets initiative has decided to drop proposed rules that would have made it harder for a data centre group, running mostly on fossil fuels, to claim its energy needs were entirely met by renewable power to reach its climate goals, four people familiar with the decision told the FT.
Companies argued that the proposal was too onerous and could backfire by discouraging clean energy investments, the people said, despite research showing that such a policy could slash emissions.
The information war over how to account for greenhouse gases has seen Big Tech pour money into the lobbying of regulators and watchdogs, as well as into academic research.
Amazon, Meta and Microsoft all have said they “match” 100 per cent of their fossil fuel energy use with clean energy investments, even as the rising energy demands of AI push them to double down on gas power.
These tech companies use certificates to offset their emissions on an annual basis.
The certificates typically represent investments in the generation of energy by solar and wind or hydropower — even if it is produced at another place in the world or at another point in time.
But SBTi proposed that when large energy users offset their use of coal or gas, they should increasingly buy renewable energy certificates that represent energy produced at roughly the same time as the energy consumed.
A technical decision-making body at SBTi last week approved a standard, due to be published in coming weeks, that would instead make this optional.
SBTi has previously told the FT that it “has strict governance and safeguards in place to ensure no disproportionate influence from any one individual, stakeholder or group of stakeholders”.
The move by standards bodies to tighten rules on net zero emissions claims is also being pursued by the Greenhouse Gas Protocol (GHG Protocol), a voluntary carbon accounting oversight body, and by the European Union.
In response, the large energy users have stepped up their lobbying of the EU and global voluntary standard-setting bodies.
Last month, a lobbying effort representing companies with $4.7tn in annual revenue — including Amazon, Apple, General Motors, Salesforce, Schneider Electric — was launched called ‘May not Shall’. It argued that hourly and location-matching energy rules should be optional.
Technical experts responsible for developing new carbon accounting rules at SBTi and the GHG Protocol were sent emails, seen by the FT, inviting them to examine the lobby group’s proposals.
Meta has been involved in a separate but similar lobby group called the Emissions First Partnership. The company has also funded a number of academic papers arguing in favour of looser restrictions.
On the other side of the debate, rival Google has a stated preference for hourly matching of energy use with renewable power generation.
A recent paper in The Electricity Journal, found that an hourly clean-energy accounting system could cut CO₂ emissions dozens of times faster than the present system.
The authors were researchers at the Electric Power Research Institute, a non-profit group with board members who are representatives of JPMorgan Chase and US and global utility companies.
Academics at Princeton University’s Low-Carbon Technology Consortium also backed this view in a 2023 paper, arguing that emissions would be minimised by accounting for electricity consumption on an hourly basis. The university consortium has been supported by companies including Google.
Certificates should represent clean energy that is new and was produced locally, they said.
The GHG Protocol said its “governance and standard-setting processes are specifically designed to safeguard independence”, and to stop individual companies or donors shaping standards.
Meta and Amazon did not provide a comment.