Chinese solar panel manufacturing giant Trina Solar says it has formally joined the global Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi).
Producing solar cells and panels is a pretty energy intensive business1, and Trina Solar certainly manufactures a lot of them. By the first quarter of this year the company had shipped more than 70GW+ of Trina Solar panels to 100+ countries, including Australia2. The firm says the panels it has produced so far are avoiding 94.22 million tons of emissions per year.
But recognising that it needs to do more in terms of its own operations, Trina Solar Chairman Gao Jifan said the company joined the SBTi to better fulfill its mission of ‘Solar Energy for All”.
“We will draw on our strategic advantages, our strong product development and innovation capabilities and our global business presence to move as swiftly as possible toward carbon neutrality and sustainable development.”
What Is The SBTi?
The Initiative supports science-based targets providing clearly-defined pathways for companies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Targets are considered ‘science-based’ if they support what is necessary to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement; which is to limit warming to well-below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and pursue efforts to limit warming to 1.5°C.
This is a goal that is becoming increasingly difficult to reach. While the electricity sector is (generally) cleaning up its act, it still represents around 40% of global energy related emissions.
So, what sort of targets has Trina put in place under the SBTi? None yet as far as I can tell – it’s a 5-step process:
- Companies submit a letter establishing an intent to set a science-based target
- They then work on an emissions reduction target in line with the SBTi’s criteria
- That is submitted to the SBTi for validation
- The target is announced
- The company reports its emissions and progress annually
SBTi says more than one thousand leading businesses are setting emissions reduction targets in line with the latest climate science. Trina Solar notes it is one of only nine companies in China that has backed the more ambitious 1.5C goal.
“Every step that Trina Solar takes will be in line with the 1.5C pledge, and we will do our utmost to create a carbon-free world,” said Mr. Gao.
One very obvious and fitting step Trina Solar can take is committing to sourcing 100% renewable energy for its operations sooner rather than later. It wouldn’t be the first major Chinese solar manufacturer to do so.
Last year, Longi committed to sourcing 100% renewables-based electricity across all its operations by 2028. JinkoSolar has pledged to power its own operations with 100% renewable electricity by 2025, and inverter manufacturer Sungrow has committed to switching to 100% renewables for its electricity requirements by 2028.
Footnotes
- But not so intensive that the energy consumed in making a solar panel is more than the panel will produce over its lifetime – that’s a well-busted myth. ↩
- On a related note – Trina ranked first in SolarQuotes’ 2021 Solar Installers Choice Awards in the budget solar panel category. ↩
About Michael Bloch
RSS - Posts
Did I read this right?
“Targets are considered ‘science-based’ if they support what is necessary to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement”
So if it isn’t politically endorsed then it isn’t science? WTF??
Don’t get me wrong, setting and aiming for the targets set in the Paris Agreement is vital to all of us but that wording makes me uncomfortable.
Michael Bloch,
Your piece includes:
“SBTi says more than one thousand leading businesses are setting emissions reduction targets in line with the latest climate science. Trina Solar notes it is one of only nine companies in China that has backed the more ambitious 1.5C goal.”
I’d suggest the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) is not science-based if it’s considered still possible to keep the Earth System from crossing the +1.5 °C global mean temperature threshold (relative to Holocene Epoch pre-industrial age).
The climate science evidence I see includes:
1a. The paleo-historical evidentiary record indicates the so-called Mid-Pliocene period was 3 to 4 million years ago, where the atmospheric CO2 levels were in the range of 400 to 450 ppm, global mean temperatures were in the range +2 to +3 °C (relative to Holocene Epoch pre-industrial age), and sea levels were in the range 10 to 22 metres higher than now.
1b. The same paleo-historical evidentiary record also indicates the so-called Mid-Miocene period was 15 to 17 million years ago, where the atmospheric CO2 levels were in the range 300 to 500 ppm, global mean temperatures were in the range +4 to +5 °C (relative to Holocene Epoch pre-industrial age), and sea levels were in the range 10 to 60 metres higher than now.
See Professor H.J. Schellnhuber’s Aurelio Peccei Lecture: “Climate, Complexity, Conversion”, delivered on 17 Oct 2018, that can be seen in the YouTube video titled “Keynote Debate Can the Climate Emergency Action Plan lead to Collective Action_ (50 Years CoR)”, published by the Club of Rome, particularly from time interval 0:23:23 through to 0:26:45 at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QK2XLeGmHtE
2. The Scripps Institution of Oceanography published an animation on YouTube on Jun 4 titled “The Keeling Curve Hits 420 PPM”, duration 59 seconds, that shows the atmospheric CO2 record from 1958 at the Mauna Loa Observatory & the ice core proxy record before 1958 – see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9UJsB4HseJs
3. NOAA recently updated its Annual Greenhouse Gas Index (AGGI). In terms of CO2 equivalents, the atmosphere in 2020 contained 504 ppm, of which 412 is CO2 alone. The rest comes from other gases.
https://gml.noaa.gov/aggi/
4. Per ERA5 data, in 2020, global mean warming (relative to Holocene Epoch pre-industrial age) was already around +1.3 °C, land mean warming was almost +2.0 °C, and ocean mean warming was just over +1.0 °C.
https://twitter.com/hausfath/status/1347632817799274496
5. Barring super-volcanic eruption, major meteor impact, and/or global thermonuclear war event(s), the Earth System is already ‘locked-in’ to surpass the +1.5 °C global mean warming threshold, likely before 2030, and on current GHG emissions trajectory, is likely to surpass +2.0 °C global mean warming threshold before 2050.
See Table 1 in: https://esd.copernicus.org/articles/12/253/2021/esd-12-253-2021.pdf
When are people going to actually look at the latest climate science and admit it’s no longer possible to achieve the “more ambitious 1.5C goal”?
That doesn’t mean we/humanity give up – it means we/humanity must work faster and more effectively to eliminate all of our GHG emissions ASAP, and urgently find & deploy large-scale safe solutions to drawdown atmospheric CO2 back to 350 ppm, to avoid civilisation collapse. Every +0.1 °C of additional warming from now on must be fought over.