What are your decarbonization objectives?
On Group-level, we aim to reduce absolute Scope 1&2-CO2-emissions by 28% by 2030 (from a 2019 base year). This target follows a ‘well-below 2°-pathway’ and has been approved by the Science-Based Targets Initiative (SBTi). On 50Hertz-level, this translates into a reduction of emissions by approx. 40% in the same timeframe.
In addition, we aim to be carbon-neutral by 2030 in our own operations (i.e. Scope 1&2 without grid losses), following an avoid-reduce-offset-logic.
By 2040, Elia Group aims to be carbon neutral for its entire Scope 1&2 emissions.
Why don’t you have a net-zero target?
At the time of setting our original SBTi-target in 2021, a net-zero target could not be combined with a ‘well-below 2°-pathway’ (see above). We are planning to review and update our target-setting in 2026, likely focusing again on a medium-term period, which we consider more impactful on the business. Our long-term target remains carbon neutrality by 2040.
Why don’t you commit to a 1.5°-compatible decarbonization ambition?
Since we set a location-based decarbonization target, we are highly dependent on the evolution of the emissions of the power mix in our region of operation. At the time of setting our original SBTi-target in 2021, a ‘well-below 2°-pathway’ was deemed to be more suitable in this context. We are planning to review and update our target-setting in 2026.
Why do you set a location-based rather than a market-based decarbonization target?
In our view, a location-based target fits better with our societal role to drive the energy transition and decarbonize the electrical system. If we are successful in this, this will also mean reducing our corporate emissions as compared to simply purchasing green electricity.
How are you planning to lower emissions from grid losses?
In absolute terms, losses are projected to increase in the coming years due to grid expansion and more complex electricity flows with higher shares of decentral electricity generation. Reducing losses in network operation would have significant negative effects on security of supply, hence the importance of lowering the CO2-footprint of the losses by greening the electricity grid mix.
How can you set a 100%-renewables target when as a grid operator you don’t decide about the generation structure?
The 100%-target primarily acts as a ‘North star’ and underscores our commitment to the energy transition and our driving role in it. Because we cannot achieve this on our own, we have been very active by e.g. suggesting to political stakeholders ways to make grid expansion more efficient and the energy transition more affordable, by boosting internal capacities for connecting RES and storage systems to the grid, and by working proactively with economic development agencies to locate e.g. data centers and other large consumers in our grid area to help local communities and the local economy and at the same time generate more demand for green energy.
Do you use an internal carbon price and, if yes, for what?
We use a shadow price of €200/t CO2 in large equipment tenders to reflect societal carbon costs.
Can you provide (more) information on your Scope 3-emissions?
We are continuously improving data quality for our Scope 3-emissions, focusing on the two main levers, purchased goods and services and capital goods. For annual Scope 3-emissions data, please see our Integrated Report. We are continuously improving the data quality for our Scope 3 emissions, focusing on the two main levers: purchased goods and services, and capital goods. Annual Scope 3 emissions data can be found in our integrated annual report.
Why do you rely on CO2-offsetting to achieve your climate objectives? Isn’t this greenwashing?
Our decarbonization strategy follows an avoid-reduce-offset-logic. Hence, we only resort to high-quality offsetting for the emissions that cannot (yet) be avoided or reduced further.