Carbon accounting is emerging as one of the most consequential climate policy fights, and it rarely makes headlines. At the center is the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, the de facto standard that divides company emissions into Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3. Businesses, academics, and NGOs are now debating whether to replace it with an e-ledger system that tracks each ton of emissions once as it moves through the supply chain. The outcome will affect corporate renewable energy purchasing, climate disclosure rules in California and the EU, and who bears responsibility for emissions from products like gasoline and steel. The debate is not just technical. Annual versus hourly matching for clean electricity purchases, double counting across supply chains, and the practical difficulty of getting every value chain participant onto a shared ledger are all unresolved. The article reports on a closed-door Aspen summit where advocates agreed to keep talking even as core disagreements remain. For anyone tracking carbon markets, climate regulation, or corporate net zero commitments, this is the background story that explains why reporting rules keep shifting.
