Could you tell us a little bit about your role in this and what happened behind the scenes that you can share?

Of course.

So as you mentioned, a few years ago, there was some quite substantial work undertaken by ISO in developing the net zero guidelines.

And that was a really important development because what it did was it worked across that landscape of voluntary standards and guidance.

and sought to pull together what was effectively a kind of blueprint that could be worked from that started to speak to convergence in this space in terms of net zero standards for organizational transition.

And it did come to my attention that the next significant step in this process was actually going to be stepping into what was a much more significant development, which is the development of the first international standard on net zero for organisations.

So at that point, I made the decision that it was a really critical time to become involved.

What was your take behind the topic of how the ISO links transition planning paradigms?

What has been happening behind the scenes in two years? What could realistically have been expected in decarbonisation activities within these large facilities? What did we expect? Maybe Kurt, did you want to paint a bit of a picture on your thoughts on this one?

So I guess given that we are in the early years of the scheme, we do need to recognize that there is a transitional element to the way in which it is ratcheting up in order to actually ratchet down those emissions.

So it's not necessarily as simple as setting the scheme up and then in year two saying, why haven't these organizations decarbonized? One aspect of that that really does come into focus in this year too is around the headroom in the scheme so that's where there's um you know additional space in the scheme that needs to be actually reduced down so that there is an effective compliance driver and i think one of the positive things that we're seeing in this second year is that there has been a material reduction in the headroom in the scheme, which means that for this compliance year, it's the first year in which total covered emissions were higher than the baselines in the reformed safeguard mechanism.

And that's where the key market driver sits for that onsite decarbonisation.

but also for entities' engagement with the carbon market.

It's what's actually driving them.

So in the first year, we didn't see that because there was still headroom.

What's your take on this one and some of the changes we might not have discussed yet?