The Science Based Targets initiative released the final Corporate Net-Zero Standard Version 2.0 on June 11, 2026. The publication moves the Standard from consultation into implementation and gives companies a clearer view of how science-based target setting will change over the next two years. Companies can begin submitting targets under Version 2.0 from February 1, 2027. Version 1.3.1 will remain available until January 31, 2028, after which all new submissions must use Version 2.0.

For corporate sustainability teams, the important change is that Version 2.0 expands the SBTi framework from target validation into implementation, progress assessment and responsibility for ongoing emissions. It also gives market instruments, energy attributes and commodity certificates a more explicit role when direct action is constrained.

‍

A transition period, not an immediate reset

Companies with existing validated targets do not need to replace them immediately. SBTi states that existing targets remain valid through their target cycle, subject to the existing five-year review provisions. Companies setting or renewing targets in 2026 are still encouraged to use Version 1.3.1, while companies submitting during 2027 can choose between Version 1.3.1 and Version 2.0.

The transition therefore creates a period in which two versions of the Standard will operate in parallel. This matters for companies making procurement decisions now. A renewable electricity agreement, renewable gas contract, sustainable fuel purchase or environmental attribute strategy designed in 2026 may still be active when the company moves into Version 2.0.

‍

Separate targets for Scope 1 and Scope 2

One of the clearest changes is the separation of Scope 1 and Scope 2 targets.

Version 2.0 requires all companies to set targets covering 100% of Scope 1 emissions. Companies can use different approaches depending on the nature of their operations, including absolute emissions reduction, emissions intensity reduction and asset-transition pathways.

Scope 2 receives its own target requirements. Companies must cover 100% of Scope 2 emissions through emissions reductions and/or an increased share of low-carbon electricity.

For electricity procurement, SBTi has strengthened the conditions attached to low-carbon electricity claims. Version 2.0 introduces location-matching requirements so that generation and consumption are connected to the same electricity system. It also introduces a 15-year age limit for generation assets used to meet certain low-carbon electricity requirements, with the intention of strengthening the link between procurement and investment in newer clean generation.

Hourly matching is also moving closer to mainstream corporate reporting. SBTi has not made hourly matching universally mandatory for target implementation. However, large electricity users will be required to measure and report low-carbon electricity performance using hourly accounting rules. Companies that achieve specified hourly matching performance levels can receive recognition under the framework.

This changes the direction of renewable electricity procurement. Annual certificate matching may continue to play a role, but buyers increasingly need to understand where and when electricity was generated, the age of the underlying asset and whether certificate systems can provide sufficiently granular data.

‍

The implementation hierarchy changes how market instruments are used

Version 2.0 introduces an implementation hierarchy that is central to understanding the future role of environmental commodities.

The first priority remains direct emissions reduction within a company's own operations and value chain. Companies are expected to use the levers available to them and pursue targets on a best-efforts basis.

Where direct action is not feasible, the Standard allows companies to act within shared systems that SBTi describes as activity pools. These can include electricity grids, gas grids, supply sheds and logistics systems. If structural barriers prevent action at that level, companies may use broader sector-level interventions.

Market instruments and projects can support these actions where they meet SBTi integrity criteria.

This is important because it gives a more structured role to instruments that sit between direct physical decarbonization and conventional offsetting. Energy attribute certificates, commodity certificates and other contractual instruments can help channel demand toward lower-carbon production within relevant markets, even when a company cannot physically trace every unit of energy or commodity through its supply chain.

SBTi specifically recognizes that different chain-of-custody models can be relevant, including mass balance and book-and-claim, subject to guardrails.

‍

Scope 3 becomes more targeted

Scope 3 remains one of the most difficult areas of corporate decarbonization because companies often depend on suppliers, customers, transport providers and infrastructure they do not control.

Under Version 2.0, Scope 3 target setting remains mandatory for Category A companies, generally larger companies in higher-income markets, while it is optional for Category B companies. The Standard also changes the way companies prioritize Scope 3 action. Category A companies are expected to focus on Scope 3 categories representing 5% or more of their Scope 3 emissions.

Companies can use several target types, including emissions reduction targets, supplier or customer alignment targets and category-specific targets.

More importantly for environmental commodities, Version 2.0 recognizes that companies may face limitations in traceability, infrastructure and access to lower-carbon alternatives. The implementation hierarchy allows actions and eligible market instruments to support progress where direct intervention is not possible.

This potentially increases the relevance of commodity certificates in areas such as renewable gas, lower-carbon industrial materials, sustainable aviation fuel and agricultural commodities.

It does not mean that any certificate can automatically be used against an SBTi target.

SBTi is developing an Interoperability and Recognition Framework that will establish criteria for certification systems and market instruments used in target implementation. The framework is expected to cover energy certificates, industrial and agricultural commodity instruments and carbon credits. Work is expected to begin with instruments used under the Ongoing Emissions Responsibility program before expanding to energy and commodity certificates.

Companies should therefore distinguish between recognition of a type of instrument and eligibility of a specific registry, methodology or certificate.

‍

Accounting is still a moving part

Version 2.0 also arrives while the GHG Protocol is revising its own corporate accounting standards.

SBTi acknowledges this directly. The new Standard incorporates elements of the emerging GHG Protocol approach, including a multi-statement reporting structure that separates the conventional physical emissions inventory from additional reporting for projects and market instruments.

A company may use an environmental commodity instrument to support target implementation without simply rewriting the physical emissions inventory. The accounting treatment, target implementation treatment and public claim may be different.

SBTi plans to issue interim accounting and reporting guidance while the GHG Protocol revision remains underway. Preliminary guidance is expected in Q4 2026 for consultation and testing. SBTi also plans additional interpretation guidance for Version 2.0 and a Claims Policy expected from Q1 2027.

Companies building environmental commodity strategies should therefore avoid assuming that procurement, inventory accounting and external claims are interchangeable.

Ongoing Emissions Responsibility creates a separate role for carbon credits

‍

Version 2.0 also introduces Ongoing Emissions Responsibility, or OER.

OER is intended to encourage companies to take responsibility for emissions released while they are still progressing toward net zero. It sits alongside emissions reduction and does not replace the requirement to decarbonize operations and value chains.

The program can include emissions reductions, removals and other forms of climate finance. From 2035, Category A companies will be required to address a portion of their ongoing emissions with removals, with the role of removals increasing toward the company's net-zero year.

This gives carbon credits and removals a clearer place within the SBTi architecture, but in a separate function from direct target achievement.

For buyers, the distinction is important. Renewable electricity certificates, renewable gas certificates, SAF certificates, commodity certificates and carbon credits may all be environmental market instruments, but they do not perform the same accounting or target function.

‍

What companies should do before 2028

Companies should first identify which current environmental commodity contracts will extend beyond January 2028. They should then assess whether those contracts provide sufficient information on geography, production source, asset characteristics, chain of custody, vintage, retirement and ownership of environmental attributes.

Electricity buyers should assess whether their current REC or EAC systems can support location matching and increasingly granular reporting.

Companies using renewable gas, sustainable fuels or lower-carbon commodities should examine whether their certificate systems can demonstrate the connection between the purchased attribute and the relevant activity pool, supply shed or sector.

Procurement teams should also separate three questions that have often been treated as one: does the instrument represent a credible environmental attribute, can it support SBTi target implementation, and how should it be accounted for and claimed publicly?

‍

The commercial impact

SBTi Version 2.0 does not remove environmental commodities from corporate decarbonization. It gives them a more defined role while increasing expectations around integrity, traceability and reporting.

That is likely to favor markets with strong registries, transparent chain-of-custody systems and clear documentation of environmental attributes. It may also increase demand for products that can demonstrate geographic relevance, temporal detail, credible sourcing and stronger links to physical decarbonization systems.

For corporate buyers, the challenge will be to build portfolios that remain commercially practical while meeting increasingly specific climate-accounting requirements.

‍

AFS Commodities supports companies sourcing and managing environmental commodities across renewable electricity, renewable gas, sustainable fuels, carbon and related markets. If your organization is reviewing how SBTi Version 2.0 may affect its procurement strategy, environmental attribute portfolio or future target implementation, contact AFS Commodities to discuss the instruments and market structures available to support your decarbonization objectives.