Shaken Not Burned

Highlighting changemakers and solutions

Glossary - Ecosystem services

These are the direct and indirect contributions made by healthy ecosystems towards human health, nutrition and economic function. Given their contribution, the term is sometimes used interchangeably with the term natural capital, but they are considered services in themselves rather than assessed solely to a specific value. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment identified four broad categories: provisioning, regulating, cultural and supporting services.

• Provisioning refers mostly to the production of food and clean water but basically covers anything extracted from nature.

• Regulating services can be anything from the control of temperature, to clear air, disposal of waste, pollination or even disease management.

• Cultural services refer to the impact of the human relationship with nature, throughout history, religious experience, even recreation and more.

• Supporting services are those that underpin all life on earth – from oxygen production to the creation of soil and nutrient cycles. 

Busting a myth

“Bees are the only pollinators”

While the honey bee plays an important role in pollination, what matters is a wider environment in which they can thrive. There are over 20,000 different species of bee but pollination is also carried out by moths, beetles and even wasps. Increased use of pesticides, combined with habitat loss and climate change is causing havoc across a range of species and geographies..

What we’ve been reading this week

• 80% of emissions can be linked to less than 60 producers

  A new report from InfluenceMap reveals that 57 fossil fuel and cement producers (investor and state owned) are responsible for a staggering 80% of global CO2 emissions since the signing of the Paris Agreement in 2016. The real problem is that not only are these operators responsible for such a huge amount of emissions, but most have expanded since the PA was signed. What will be interesting to watch is how such clearly connected and robust data is used to support action from a wide range of stakeholders. While the climate problem is a system problem, there are clear levers of action to be found.

• New York is demanding more action on fossil fuel finance

  While banks continue to finance new fossil fuel and gas, as well as meat and dairy and other GHG intensive impact industries, some jurisdictions are looking for greater clarity on whether or not banks are all talk no action – or are actually serious about the low carbon transition. After what NYC described as ‘successful shareholder engagements,’ New York City Comptroller Brad Lander announced that three of the largest North American banks have been persuaded to publicly disclose their financing ratio of low-carbon energy to fossil fuels, setting a new standard for the banking sector. JPMorgan Chase, Citi, and the Royal Bank of Canada will regularly disclose their ratio of clean energy supply financing to fossil fuel extraction financing (Energy Supply Ratio), as well as their underlying methodology. The agreement shows the potential for continued engagement by activist shareholders, but it is also yet another signal that, like it or not, transparency is increasing in the financial sector and more disclosures are on the way. 

• The UK could increase its clean energy generation by 13x

  The UK already needs to double its clean energy production to meet increasing demand from EVs, replace fossil fuels and help drive the transition. New analysis from Friends of the Earth and Exeter University found that 374,900 hectares – totalling 2.9% of land in England – is ‘most suitable’ for new onshore wind and solar farms. They argue that lifting barriers to onshore wind and solar power could produce 13 times more electricity than current levels generated by these sources in England. It’s also worth remembering the potential economic benefit of focusing on green growth in the UK. The UKSIF Energy report 2024 found that 63% of UK energy companies are already looking to move investments abroad to a better market for their sustainability goals, amid a challenging domestic policy and regulatory framework

• SSAB’s new fossil free steel mill could cut Swedish emissions 7%

  While the sector has claimed extreme difficulty with the decarbonisation of steel, steel giant SSAB is to invest $5 billion into a fossil free steel mill in Lulea, Sweden. When completed, SSAB will close the current blast furnace-based production system. Overall this will reduce Sweden’s CO2 emissions with 7% in addition to the 3% from the previously announced Oxelösund mill conversion. The total mini-mill investment is estimated to be €4.5 billion, including contingencies. What’s really interesting here is that by investing in new technologies, SSAB says it will be avoiding investments otherwise required in existing plant and equipment of €2 billion during the next 10 years. Given that the company has just closed a delivery agreement for fossil free steel to John Deere Oy from 2026, the ability to cut investment in old technology and transfer it to an area with a growing customer base simply looks like good business.

• SBTi to extend use of carbon credits for net zero

  The Science Based Targets initiative said that it will expand the use of carbon offsets to cover Scope 3 emissions in its net zero target setting framework. Its Corporate Net-Zero Standard was launched in 2021, to assess and certify companies’ decarbonisation commitments to achieve net zero emissions and to ‘act as a blueprint’ for companies’ science-based climate target setting. Initially, that meant decarbonisation of 90-95% by 2050, allowing 5-10% of residual emissions that are not yet possible to cut to be offset with credits. The number of companies with validated science-based climate targets more than doubled over the past year, reaching 4,204 at the end of 2023, compared to 2,079 in 2022. While the increase in the number of companies looking to set targets is positive, it is critical to ensure that the process is not weakened. The SBTi already has challenges in measuring progress in companies that are disrupting carbon intensive sectors (because they cannot cut absolute emissions if they grow to replace incumbents) and this process will have to be watched carefully.