Addressing Emissions Management Challenges: Insights from Industry Experts and Survey Finding

Meeting bold and vital net zero goals must begin with a true picture of your enterprise emissions, coupled with cross-functional collaboration. GE Vernova and Reuters Events surveyed 550+ industry experts about their emissions management challenges and discussed the findings in a webinar.

Watch the webinar to:

• Gain new insights on how companies are monitoring and managing carbon emissions
• Diagnose what’s missing from your decarbonization strategy
• Explore effective tools for measurement and management of GHG emissions




--
TRANSCRIPT
Hello and welcome to today's webinar. My name is Owen. I head up the Energy Transition division here at Reuters, and I have the pleasure of being your chair for the session today. Brilliant topics to discuss today and a great panel of experts who I'll come on to shortly. Title of the session. Measure of what you can manage.  
 
And the hypothesis really is simple. You cannot manage what you cannot measure when it comes to the topic of carbon reporting, and carbon management on the road to net zero. Of course, companies and countries are all at different stages when it comes to this topic. But it's important for all. You need to start with the start with the measuring and start with, the management so that you can then move on to effective reporting, compliance and effective action, ultimately against your net zero goals.  
 
To identify some of the gaps, challenges, and avenues for improvement, we recently teamed up with GE Vernova to survey over 600 industry professionals on this very topic, and to sketch a comprehensive view of the realities of carbon emission management practice across the energy industry. Many of these will be seen in the report. It's brought up some really interesting findings, and a few of these findings we look to dig into today.  
 
We'll, of course, send out the full report. Some of you will have seen it already. But if you haven't had access, you'll get access to that after this session. Without further ado, to explore these themes, I have the pleasure of introducing Chet Hullum, Senior Director of Product Management at GE Vernova. Laney Brown, vice president of sustainability at Avangrid. Olivia Reynolds, vice president of sustainability and ESG at Kosmos Energy.  
 
Maybe Olivia we’ll come to you. Come to you first. Was this, why is this topic so important? Why have you joined us today? Kind of, keen to hear a bit more about how Kosmos Energy is tackling space. Thanks, Owen. So, as you've pointed out, it's important to be able to to measure what you're trying to manage. And Kosmos Energy has a, climate strategy that kind of revolves around a couple of different pillars so that there's our policy commitments, and our targets around GHG emissions management and obviously we need to be able to measure those GHG emissions or calculate those emissions in order to track progress against those targets. Critically, we also then need to understand how we're going to, reduce those emissions and in events that we cannot reduce or how are we going to mitigate them. So all of this spans on having a reliable, credible, accessible set of data that will allow my team, to understand our impacts, the risks and opportunities related to carbon emissions, and have wholesome conversations with teams across the business to see what we're going to do to take advantage of those opportunities and mitigate those risks. So, long story short. Calculating emissions it underpins that entire suite of work. Sure, sure. An a brilliant, way to kind of open up the conversation. And I think, yeah, really keen to dig into actually how you're doing that at Kosmos Energies we as we move through.  
 
But ah Laney, maybe I'll come to you next. Yeah. Vice president, Sustainability, Avangrid. So what does that mean? And, kind of. Yeah. Why are you so passionate about this space? Yeah. Thank you. And, I think a couple of things. One is, I think echoing a lot of what Olivia has said, we have, strong commitment for carbon neutrality, but, for scopes one and two by 2030. So we have seven years to do this. We have to make sure that we understand that data to help drive prioritization. So what do we focus on first. And then and then again, how are we moving through that process? How are we seeing fluctuations or changing, changes? Based on our, you know, different activities and then therefore, again, driving action. I think the other thing to that, we'll talk talk about later is just the expectation of disclosures. So we have, expectations on our emissions reporting across all of our regulation jurisdictions state, federal. We also support EU reporting. So being able to ensure that we fully understand that data and how that might be presented in different jurisdictions and understand any variance, is very important. Yeah, absolutely. And as you say, lots to come back to there as well. But to round out the introductions chat. Yeah. Keen to to hear a bit more about the work that you're doing. And how that fits into what Laney and Olivia has started to, to unpack for us.  
 
Yeah. So we, I've, I've worked in the energy space for a long time, and, I've, I've worked in services, and I've been the last eight years in the technology area helping customers in the energy space. And, this issue, with emissions and sustainability is, is so far reaching, it, it hits every part of, of the business, the business operations and ultimately, what we're doing on the planet. And so I'm super I, I really love working this space. I think it's, of all the challenges with the energy transition and the elements that the our customers have to go through, this is one that touches every space, every piece of it. And particularly with GE Digital, we have a really, perfect opportunity to really support, our customers with the things like accurate data and also, visibility and, and also fitting that into the larger GE Vernova and helping them through, the sustainability projects and programs that they, want to do to achieve their net zero target. So I love the space. I love working in the area. And I love helping customers that we have, within our portfolio. So. Thanks, Chet. And a lovely round of introductions. So once again, thanks all for for joining. Thanks, everyone. On the call as well today.  
 
Looking forward to to digging into things now. I kind of led with that in the introduction, obviously. We teamed up with, the guys at GE Vernova to really dig into this kind of emissions management, kind of challenge. We, we surveyed over 600, industry professionals to get their thoughts, their barriers, blockers and enablers in this space. So, Chet, perhaps I'll come to you first on that. What was kind of the purpose of the report that we that we put together? And what's the rationale behind kind of the structuring of the inquiries we put together? Yeah, we reached out to Reuters. We obviously we have, customers in the space. We understand the ecosystem and our customers, I mean, have issues there. And we had a lot of voice of customer from some of our direct customers about exactly how they can, not only meet their net zero targets, but how do they get accurate data, how do they track this, how they track their projects to really understand the baseline and where they're going through.  
 
But we didn't have a broad view. I mean, 600, recipients and also understanding the different personas that that attack this. I'm sure as Laney, Olivia, Olivia, will we'll talk about, later that there's multiple folks in the organization that are that are dealing with, emissions reporting, auditing, sustainability projects, etc.. Understanding scope three, your suppliers. So it's a it's a large persona group, and it was important for us to, get a large, survey out or something that we felt we could come back to. And then how can we help and how can we attack those problems and understand our value proposition to support those, and, and get a more accurate view of the market space. So, it was it was super helpful, with working with Reuters and doing that. We learned a lot and learned a great deal from the, the study. And I think that'll help us as an ecosystem really tackle a lot of the problems. We kind of suspected that there was a problem with getting accurate data and sort of how do we we collect, collect that how do you, create a ledger that, that the organization can use and, but, some of that was sustained and some of the findings that we found, as well as many other, other outcomes that we found later. So, yeah, absolutely.  
 
And thanks for kind of setting the scene for us that you've kind of touched on, I guess that hypothesis, the idea that potentially, there's, there's problems accessing the data. And I think we'll come back to some of those findings as well. Of course, actually some of the other challenges that came up as well, would you say, largely speaking, kind of the trends we identified in the results kind of aligned with what we kind of set out to, to achieve and and how does this reflect the kind of reality across the industry that you see today? You know, I think largely it did. I think we, confirmed a lot of elements that, we found that a lot of customers were struggling with collection in terms of, the accuracy of how they were doing it, where they were getting it from, how to manage that. Some were turning to outside third party organizations, expensive, elements to be able to build their reporting capabilities and then understanding how urgent this need is.  
 
And I think that was some of the other findings. And and it varies from customer to customer, and then obviously region to region and where you are and where you sit, in terms of the globe. But for most, you're on a, a maturity curve, if you will, in terms of, some are very mature in terms of what they need to do and how they collected and where they're using technology, etc. others are just starting the process, and you can see that within the this the, the survey results. So a lot of our hypothesis of that everyone is in need of so some sort of healthier was, was confirmed by a lot of the responses itself. Briliiant. I think, obviously, Laney and Olivia to, to bring you in, you of course weren't involved in the survey design or anything like that, but it's organizations like Avangrid and like Kosmos Energy that we were that we were serving and trying to find, find out information on. So, perhaps I'll come to you first. Olivia. Can you add some color to it? Just for us, in terms of how you are approaching kind of this kind of carbon emissions reporting, framework. So at Kosmos Energy, how are you set up to do it at the moment? What does it look like for for you guys?  
 
Thanks, Owen. And I think Chet has rightly identified that a lot of companies around the world kind of are on this trajectory. I hate to use the word journey, but it is a journey. On what GHG accounting means in the scope of their organization. And so Kosmos Energy started off with setting up the systems, tools and processes to calculate operated scope one and two emissions. And we did that in large part by developing a custom application that, will capture the data on a daily basis from our rigs, our seismic activity, helicopters, getting folks off shore, back home again, support vessels. And we found that that, application meant that it really reduce the manual data entry. It reduced the odds of error. It made it more accessible to people on a more regular basis. And so we got that up and running. We're really proud of that tool. And now it's kind of what's next and how do we progress and having mature our accounting methodology. And so last year we disclosed our equity scope one emissions for the first time. So this is now moving from what's within our operational control to where we have emissions associated with those investments, for example, with our joint partners. And I think this is really key for a company like Kosmos, because we don't actually operate a majority of the assets that we, have an investment in. And that creates a whole different set of challenges, right? Because each partner that we work with might have their own accounting approaches, their own tools, their own processes.  
 
And so when you're then dependent on, partners and you want to work together with those partners to collate and present and disclose information, to understand that information, you have to start navigating those systems as well. So I think, to highlight it's something we are always working on, looking to improve, refining those assumptions and those processes and those tools to try and improve the ability for us to understand and use the information effectively. No. Thank you. That's yeah, a lot of color. It sounds like a brilliant app that you guys have been working on. And yeah, keen to see what's next as, as as you say, interesting points you mentioned as well about kind of that structure of of operating assets. And I'm sure that varies quite a lot internationally. I think there's a finding that will come on to later in the session to, to come back to that. But, Laney, keen to hear the same from you really. Really a bit of a sense in terms of how you're tackling the emissions management issue at Avangrid. Yeah. And I was going to say journey, but I'm scratching that obviously. But just to say, I think we are moving. Yeah. Another maybe another thing is from immaturity to maturity. And I think everyone is there in that space.  
 
There is always opportunity to continue to refine, to improve the data. And so similarly, I think, actually very similar, I think, to what Olivia was saying, we are and we are not doing real time, we, we actually are doing quarterly, but we've just transitioned to looking at reviewing our emissions data, on a quarterly basis. We are actually in the process of looking at and structuring a transition away from operational controls to equity control, equity, so that we have a view we likely will need to maintain two versions of that, actually. So again, the complexity and, in the structures and the variability that we meet, the different views we may need to present on our emissions is going to be very important. Recognizing various reporting requirements we may have. I think the other thing to we are continuing to mature. So we've been reporting as part of and I should say our parent company, Iberdrola, is has been reporting as part of the EU and a mandated requirement since 2017.  
 
But overall, our greenhouse gas emissions, as a whole has been reported publicly since 2015. And we have continued to look at and refine, I think, with real, very strong focus, I would say in the last two years. But we have a variety of data sources, particularly because we're focused on scope one and two. The data that we have that we report to the EPA, very strong controls and structures around that, as one example. But the emissions that we're looking at as part of our facilities, you know, we're calculating based on our, electricity invoices. So a real range of data sources, a real range of frequency. And, and, you know, for each of those, we're standing up standard operating procedures. We also have eight operating companies. And how we report on things like SF6 emissions historically might be different in each operating company. So now we're trying to create the structures, the processes, the protocols, to to be uniform in that to have flexibility and variability in where and what way we report that. So again, continuing on on that refinement maturity of all of our reporting. Brilliant. Again, thanks for for that, I guess, to to kind of wrap up this, this first section before we, we dig into actually some of the findings themselves. Chet, in terms of those reflections then and I guess what both Olivia and, and Laney have just added. Ultimately the findings of the report so far, have they reinforced your perception of the role of, of carbon emission management in the energy transition? If so, why? How? Your thoughts on that?  
 
Yeah, absolutely. And I think that's what you see when you ask a question. And I mean, it can be very binary, but, you know, when you look, across those though, the whole set, you can see that especially when you talk with folks like Laney, you know, and Olivia and you then you really get the, the essence of that. Everyone's on this sort of maturity curve of where they are. But we can see a path. We can see it where there are certain elements that are now that you might be concerned with, with accurate reporting or accurate data collection or collaboration of data and bringing aggregation of data, might be the, the key right now. But then ultimately you want to use that data into understanding your abatement strategies and your business operations and what you should be doing to ultimately reach your goal. And that's where the stuff around technology and the larger set of things start to come in. So if you ask the question today about advanced analytics or AI, it might be like, not so much right now, but at some point those things happen. But you've got to start with good, clean, accurate data to build toward where you're trying to go. And ultimately, you know, what you're trying to do within your business, which is either get a return on investment on those strategies that you're doing, or capitalize on some of the things that you're doing.  
 
And, a way to view that and see that through through some of the technology or some of the help that, that the ecosystem can bring. So, I think that's all there. I think it's just that you've got to you've got to be you got to pace yourself and where you are on on that journey. So. Thanks. Thanks, Chet. Let's get into, I guess, some of the, the findings. And I think the first one that we've, we've pulled out here actually kind of talks to this curve that, that we've kind of already identified, in the beginning of this session. So over 50% of participants ultimately didn't agree that that organization had to necessarily be necessary, reliable and near time data emissions to inform, inform the strategies. However, only 7% of respondents, said that they weren't actually confident in the data that they did have. So we're seeing here potentially, a bit of a disconnect basically. So lots don't have the data that those that do have. They're all becoming increasingly confident in it. Chet, firstly, keen to get your thoughts on on how you'd interpret that data.  
 
And then Olivia and Laney, maybe we can talk about what you think. You you can pitch yourselves within within that, that journey. But, Chet, let's come to you first. I absolutely. Yeah. And. Yeah. And that's, that's kind of like it seems like. Yeah, it should be both. I need that those two things to happen at the same time. But I think that's what we're kind of seeing is that there's this, delayed effect of maturity of of what I need now, I don't I mean, I think when you touched on it earlier, I'd say about, again, like, the near real time, obviously, I've, you know, real time is is relative term and there's elements of control real time. And then there's elements of just getting things that you can react to say, day, or week of. And then there's reporting which doesn't happen, you know, more quarterly or something like that. Or, monthly. And that's where that bridge is starting to close a bit. But I think if you look at most of the respondents, especially now, we're early on in this, journey, or as you’d say early on in this, this sort of transition in terms of what we're doing for net zero across the board and then the, the urgencies of of different things, in service, especially with real time emissions or real time reporting, are there as, as opposed to accuracy being more relevant right now. And I think that's the thing. But I think it's especially for me from the aspect of living from a system meeting or digitalization point of view. It's something we build on right over time, and that's what we that's kind of what we see. So I thought that it was very, telling and kind of expected that we would see, something along those results from, from, some of the folks that's in mirrors or what we heard from, from our direct customers as we talk directly. So, so it's good to hear. That's good to hear.  
 
And, I guess then to, to look at that kind of a bit more. Olivia, you mentioning that you do have that kind of now, kind of almost instantaneous or instantaneous kind of, measurement, at your, at your plant. So on that curve, I'd say you're kind of more towards the, the confidence side of the dates. Would that be fair to say or anything you'd add on that? It's an interesting when you start talking about accuracy and precision of GHG emissions calculations. So yes, we capture a lot of the data, on a, on a daily basis. In my role, I'm, I'm certainly not looking at it on a daily basis. Right. So again, I start to get more involved when I'm trying to, understand implications for, for strategy, and, and disclosure and reporting and things like that. But I do think that this idea of precision and accuracy is a nutty one, because I think there's a misconception that, you know, it's accounting, like financial accounting, and there's a set of rules, and we know how to follow that when we know how to do them. And yet, if you start digging into the methodologies and the Ts and Cs, you find that a lot of it is still up for interpretation. So even when you're working with established international frameworks like the GHG protocol or you work with, industry guidance.  
 
So, you know, even honing in on the oil and gas industry, looking at things like IP or the API, there's still a lot of room for interpretation for companies as to how they are going to calculate. So I use the word calculate quite deliberately, because most of the time we're not measuring stuff, we're using proxies and assumptions and emission factors to give our best estimate and calculate what these things are. And so I think I've been doing this for a long time now, and I have 15 plus years. And at the start there's that desire to be accurate because you think that you have to be accurate to make the right decision. And I think over time you realize that it's about being comfortable that you've done the best that you can within those priorities that Laney was talking about, to focus your attention on the things that matter, to focus the attention on the things that you think you can influence as part of your business that are relevant to your business and hone in on that. And at the end of the day, if you know your your emissions, you know, over the last year, kind of around 40,000 tonnes, if I found out in a year's time, ten years time, that they were 39 rather than 40,000, it's probably not going to affect the decision I was going to make, but it would affect it if I was coming up with 4000. Right. So, it's just a word of caution of becoming, too focused on precision and accuracy instead of understanding the trend and the trajectory and how it will actually inform your decision making, because it's very easy to spend a lot of time, effort and resource to improve the accuracy when it might not actually affect the outcomes.  
 
Laney, I can see you kind of nodding along to pieces of that. Is that kind of resonant to? I absolutely it completely resonates. And I think there's a maybe building off of what Olivia said, I think there's two things that whether you're talking about emissions calculations or you're talking about any data, right. It's the 8020, hopefully 80% of your data is good. There's always going to be data that could be refined, corrected, etc. Because also fundamentally, when it comes to data collection, when it comes to you've got people, processes and systems. And we work in 24 states with over And I don't know how many systems collecting information. So, so that, that so I think, yes, we continue to mature in that process to make our data better. I feel much more comfortable about it this year than I did last year and, you know, and keep going. But I also know there's going to be wrong data, because that's always going to be the case. And so I think I completely agree with Olivia in terms of, you're doing the best you can. It's going to be more than directionally correct.  
 
We have to be. And and I think, the other thing that's important here is the rigor that's going to be that is going to be required. Thinking about SEC climate disclosure as an example, that it will have to be the same level of assurance and confidence that you have in your financial data. That's just a whole other level. And so we are continuing to work to get to that, to the structures. Again, the processes around that. But so the findings for me in this case make complete sense, which is, yes, we are getting we are getting better, but we also know we don't have 100% accurate data. I think to that I'm on that. If I could on that on that point is you think the the market dynamics, that's the element that kind of forces you into those, those elements of how accurate, etc. When you start talking about, regulatory elements coming in or an opportunity to have a monetization market or, trading market, now you need verification, you need validation, you need that level of accuracy, or at least a verified verification type process, whether it's within blockchain or some sort of technology that sort of tracks that. And that's where the technology pieces can help.  
 
And but do you ever get away from the estimation, do you ever get, with advanced analytics helping you with those? That's probably not. You probably always have some degree of that, particularly with, the broadness of the value chain with scope three and scope two data and the difference of scope one. And what you do might be a little bit more confident, but ultimately that gets passed along in the chain. So I think the market is taking shape in all of that. But here's the thing. How do you start that process? Because it is also expensive to go back and start changing where you where you've done or how you've done different things. We saw that. We saw that in the in the changes with, you talk about finance, Sarbanes-Oxley, you know, when that came about. There was an element that was a progression and a maturity there. And ultimately, things became a very much more accurate, a lot more dependencies on software and different technology. But it didn't happen overnight. It takes time for those things to happen. So I totally agree with that. Yeah. And and if I could just interject, Chet, to build off of what you said, I think that's one of the things I did a fair amount of work on grid modernization, where you're looking at investments and asset 30 year life with, you know, communication capabilities that typically have a 3 or 5 year life.  
 
So that being that thinking ahead of how do I anticipate what I might need from a systems and systems perspective is super important. Particularly if you look at the rigor around verifications and the variability across disclosures. Exactly, that's the thing I think we all have to think about is can we can get something if someone asks, okay, what are your emissions today? What are you doing? You'll do the best you can. You'll come up with that reward you through calculations.  
 
You do whatever you need to do. But ultimately when that starts to be more than just a report and more in terms of monetization or more in terms of perfecting larger strategies or how you might operate a particular asset, then it it a that you need a lot more rigor and then it starts to become a need rather than a nicety, you know, or something like that. And we started that by talking around kind of the accuracy piece in the data itself. But then the other component obviously being the actual people involved in doing that. And I think an interesting thing that that came from that report was, you know, still didn't have anyone looking at it. And almost half, the companies we surveyed felt that it was about 50%. So 50% felt it was about five or so in their workforce. So, is that reminiscent? To what? To what you guys are seeing, you know, other potential risks.  
 
Do you think companies are putting enough people and resource into this at the moment, or is it again, is it part of that, that curve that we started by talking about? Maybe Olivia will come to you to you first on on the on the workforce question really. Thanks. I think it's again, it's something we spent a lot of time and effort on over the last couple of years, and I think it originally started off as a kind of specialist function. You know, one person in the team who was the GHG accounting. And we realized quite quickly to Chet's earlier point that because so many people are starting to use access or try to understand this data, that we need to to spread that knowledge across the group. So we worked with a third party expert in, in GHG accounting, to develop a training course, which I think more than 10% of the company attended. And it was three half days.  
 
That goes through the core principles of the GHG protocol in accounting, what it means for a company like ours, what our peers are doing and how to affected things. And to really try and build up a better understanding, not just of the accounting, but of the emission sources and how it was being used, how us, stakeholders externally were going to be looking at this information, how pitfalls in that? So I think, you know, we've certainly spent a lot of time on that. I think the hardest piece when it comes to skills and capacity is, it's still a comparatively new field. And just to touch on the points that Laney was making as we look for more rigor, there going to be more and more people, whether because of reporting regulations, where they're going to have to start reporting and or because of regulations that require at least, third party limited assurance, I think there is going to be a bit of a vacuum of skills that are needed to support this, you know, new sets of, reporting and then the assurance to go with it. So, I do think that that's an area where if people are looking for careers, for life, this is certainly something where you will be busy forever and always. But jokes aside, it's it's understanding those different frameworks and those rules, but critically, it's understanding the context that goes with them because it's not black and white science.  
 
And to build that understanding whenever you're going to be looking at GHG emissions data, to know that it's very difficult to compare. And there's very few things of consistency and and so to build that awareness and the critical questioning that goes with it, I think is going to make this much stronger. Thanks. Thanks, Olivia. I mean, it kind of actually links into, a question we have here. You mentioned it's so difficult to compare. And we said we're going to look at the, the regulatory landscape. But just as we've got a question has come in on this, do you think it's realistic or does the panel think it's realistic to have more standardization in terms of measurement, reporting, auditing at a global level? Is that something we should push towards? Is it realistic? I know there's there's varying frameworks around the world at the moment. Chet or Laney, maybe one of you wants to take that first. Do you think we can get more just that kind of conformity or standardization in this system?  
 
There are you're right. There are a lot of the standards or disclosures. I think it will mature over time. You know, I, and there will be standards that are set or structures that are set. But I do think there's still going to be variability if you look across industries, if you look at technologies, I think there's still and yeah, I think there's still going to be variability. I would be concerned to some extent if you get to something that is so specific, just in my experience, from a regulatory perspective, if you have something that is so prescriptive, you're almost impossible to follow, because of variability across different businesses. Yeah, I agree, with Laney, I think, I think maybe in reporting, there, there there might be a lot of similarities region to region. And that, you know, if you squint, it kind of looks the same. But I think the auditing elements of things, those might, those will, will, will always be variable.  
 
I think the way that you do maybe calculations or the utilization of different technologies, that will definitely vary. And then of course, if you start, talking about capitalization of those elements or monetization of those, that that's going to be something I think that will be variable across region, region. But I think here's the thing, I think that the markets can adapt and customers can I mean, you know, where you operate. We as as players, we're, you know, GE Vernova. We're a global business. We operate in, assets, and we have assets across the globe. And we always deal with different regulations in different places. It's just more about the defining and sort of making those, known, and, and, and coming to agreement on those I think is the, is the main thing that I think a lot of us are excited about, like, can we, can we get there so that we can solve problems and so we can get there?  
 
I think that's the biggest thing when you're just saying, well, we'll just do it like they do it in Europe, or we'll do it like this, because we haven't defined anything yet. Well, that's probably not the right answer. So it so at some point I think we'll see at least the concrete elements of standardization so that we can go to. And that's really all I think we can ask for. And maybe just to add, I think the other thing, at least from, from, from my perspective, there are some associations, like trade organizations and associations that have been working to help standardize. So I'll just use as an example, EEI is working with utilities to come up with relevant greenhouse gas, you know, kind of structures and what is aligned. So that at least you are for maybe a specific group of, you know, utility companies, IOUs in the US, there's some standards that can help create alignment.  
 
So that might be an evolution or more transparency as, as, as an example. And it might be what sets the the baseline, the future of what that looks like. And that's why those organizations are so important in being part of those sets for sure. Yeah. Interesting. Interesting. The it kind of links into, I guess, a point that we, we saw really like basically a top line figure I think is almost half of, of respondents ranked regulation and compliance ultimately is the top driver, for organizational carbon emissions reporting. And I think we've kind of skirted around this topic so far. Laney, you mentioned actually, in your introduction, obviously, that Avangrid is majority owned by Iberdrola in Spain. Obviously. Of course, you're you're operating primarily on the US. So this is all well and good. Everything we're discussing. But how does the international, kind of, reporting landscape, affect the way that, that, that you do account and report for, for your emissions data. Yeah. You know, so so just to provide the full landscape, there's kind of the new California legislation, that we will qualify for. So we will have to report in California for both. Well, the climate disclosures, all three scopes of greenhouse gas. We are anticipating and preparing for SEC climate disclosure.  
 
So that will have a potentially different view. The equity based versus operating controls vehicle, greenhouse gas emissions we are seeing in are we are regulated in New York and Connecticut. We are seeing, regulatory activity around greenhouse gas emissions, potential different views on how to look at EPA standards as an example. And then we have the global reporting. So we will be as a sub holding supporting the CSR reporting for Iberdrola. And that may have its own different, structures around, greenhouse gas protocols. So yes, very much a factor that we think about a lot as we think about the many, many levels of potential disclosures we have from and I'll just say, I think, as we're preparing and thinking about that, there's a couple of things that are top of mind for me. One is we've actually just stood up a sustainability organization, sorry, a sustainability operations organization. So we think about how do we scale systems, processes, etc..  
 
So that that's something that, we have to scale. The other thing too, is how we think about systems. And I had noted that a little bit in terms of that future proofing, that thinking holistically. So how do we break down all the potential elements around emissions to their lowest level, so that we have the ability to, to, assemble, if you will? Depending on the disclosures and the different reporting, and traceability. Right, so that we, we can go back and understand, what do we report for CSRD, what did we report in New York, for our gas emissions. And how does that all connect together? That's going to be really critical for us. So those are the things that we are thinking about is really fundamental building blocks to be able to scale, to support the wide area of disclosures that we have in front of us. Right. Seems like a very wide kind of, landscape indeed, but interesting to hear about some of those building blocks. Olivia are you facing similar challenges, within Kosmos Energy. Is there anything you'd add or, or build on that, Laney sort of mapped for us there?  
 
I can only echo the comments that Laney made, I suppose. For context. Kosmos Energy is based in Texas, but we've got operations and across the Atlantic margins, particularly in West Africa, and we're not the operator for those, operations in West Africa. Many of those companies are European based. Our partners are European based. So they're more likely to follow or to be starting to put together their processes and systems for CSRD. We are waiting to understand what the SEC proposal is going to look like. You know, we've reviewed what the initial proposal was last year. Still waiting for the actual one, but that's going to very much affect our reporting because we're based in the US. And I think perhaps what's slightly or maybe slightly different from Laney's experience is we are the parent company for Kosmos. You know, we don't have subsidiaries, but we're going to be working with partners who are independent companies, who are elsewhere. So how do we then, get access to the data in the format and the timelines that we need?  
 
If CSRD is asking for different things, different timelines than the SEC, for example, and that's going to, you know, that's my biggest worry, going forward is thinking about how, I'm going to be able to maintain those requirements or what kind of, how are we going to be able to mitigate that risk, recognizing that we do not control some of the data that we're likely going to have to be disclosing to the SEC and all of the controls that go with that. And so it's going to be something that we're going to have to navigate quite carefully. That being said, again echoing Laney's points, we feel that because we have developed systems for the current, reporting frameworks that we follow and we've got the data, the granular position, we are hopeful that we're going to be in a stronger position because we've got that base. And so it's going to be a case of pivoting and adjusting rather than starting from scratch. But I'm probably not going to be making too many changes to my systems and processes until I understand what that SEC regulation is going to look like.  
 
Absolutely, absolutely. Chet, I'm keen to bring you in here on on some of the risks and solutions as well, and perhaps slightly unfairly kind of asking two questions in one really. But I'm keen to get your reflections on, kind of this global kind of regulatory milieu that, Olivia and Laney mentioned, but also to bring in a final finding, from the report, is this idea that kind of technological sophistication is another key kind of area that we need, to, to, to overcome. So 60% of respondents said they needed smarter processes specifically, and another 60% roughly said that they needed more automation in the system. So essentially your reflection on those two things, is there a link? Is there a potential solution in there as well? Keen to hear your thoughts? Yeah, I think so.  
 
And I think that there, as those we talked about the regulation and compliance, those elements then affect businesses and what Olivia, Olivia and Laney were mentioning and then the investments that the business takes into doing those things, that's what we find is a lot of like, I mean, is this kind of this whole element, this whole area that's come about it. It's is it the sustainability office? Is it in EHS? Is it in operations? Is it in planning? Is it in strategy? Is it in IT? Is it in CIO and what you're doing there? And so the the answer is this is all of them. But how do you how do you make those investments so that you can actually make a progression within your business to meet those, goals that you're trying to achieve, whether it's just not just the net zero goals. But where you're trying to invest, where you're trying to put resources, where you're trying to capitalize and, and do those things. So those strategies that you're coming up with, it takes a little bit of advanced technology to be able to then understand what those mean.  
 
So as an example, if you're really we're not there yet, but if you're trying to tie how assets are operating to how emissions are being governed from that, well, that those two different parts of the organization, like there's there's the operations piece that are doing things based off demand, based off management of that demand, etc., versus the sustainability group that might be looking a little bit forward or looking at projects. Well those things really actually go hand in hand. In a perfect world where there's data available, where there's systems that talk to each other, where there's collaboration, and that's what we see as technology being able to help bridging those gaps between organizations within the organization, between functions within the organization, so that everyone can get on those common platforms of goals, because that's what it's going to take.  
 
A CFO may make a decision on a particular investment based off different criteria than what something is looking at from a sustainability, or an operator or COO may make those decisions. And we want to sort of see how technology can help bridge that, where everyone's looking at the same board of view, and then being able to make those decisions as a team. And I think that's where technology can really help bridge this gap. So not only the element of accuracy data and then sort of aligning to what's going on with the regulatory world, but ultimately where your business is going now that you have this map of the environment and you know, this data, how do you manage that as a business team? And I think that's where technology can really help. That's where it's helped in the past. Where companies have had to make decisions and you see that systems and data and the interaction of those and technology like advanced analytics, like AI, can do things like scenario modeling, what if scenario planning, predict predicting out into the future, looking at different ways to operate. And the business team can then make choices and decisions based off real, real technology that can help them make those choices. And that's that's where I see it coming together.  
 
Thanks. Thanks Chet. And I think really kind of fascinating insights from, from everyone. So so thanks for sharing so far. Obviously we've looked at the data itself. We've looked at workforce regulation. We've looked at tech. We have about ten minutes left already, believe it or not. So I'm keen to look then kind of more forward. You know, we started with this hypothesis of the idea that you you simply can't manage what what you can't measure. And when you're not measuring. So companies kind of listening in today and executives, kind of at various points in the curve that we've discussed that will be looking for solutions and strategies to actually improve this. Kind of measurement and management. So I'm keen to get thoughts from the group on that. What concrete outcomes expect, can we ultimately expect from shifting to these strategies, and what concrete strategies are there in the first place to, to better manage, and measure our emissions? So maybe, Olivia, I'll come to you first. You always come to me first. Yeah. So there was a lot in there, so I. Where do I want to start?  
 
I think, Oh, gosh. I think, I got I'll go with this one that I think, it's really important whenever you're talking about systems and tools and technology to know what the exam question is, what are you trying to solve? And then look to the systems and processes to help you get there. If you lead with the technology, I sometimes find a gap between where you end up with versus where you're trying to go. And then I think similarly, one of the things that I've seen across the sustainability space. So if I take the liberty now of stepping back from a pure emissions perspective and look at, data across sustainability, the data requests have proliferated in the last ten years. And I think that over time, companies start from not reporting a lot, and then they go to the other extreme and they report loads, and then they come back somewhere in the middle.  
 
And it's about this idea of prioritizing. So yes, there's an element of measuring what you need to manage, but I think I'd go a step further and say you want to measure the least amount of the most important information, and then put your resources and your effort into those points so that the teams who are involved in collecting the data, the teams that are involved in assessing the data or checking the data, see a link between the data and what it's being used for. And it becomes a lot more real to them, because the last thing we want is data for data sake. Because that's exhausting and expensive. So, I encourage everyone to think about what's the least amount of the most important stuff and then work hard to be comfortable with that. And take the different teams with you to understand what that means. Thank you. I appreciate your top left of my screen. So you probably have the disadvantage of often being the the first one. But I think yeah. Mentioning kind of yeah. Firstly, looking at the exam question that you have, as you say, and working out, exactly what you, what you need to do and then ultimately prioritizing in the key areas essentially is what I'm getting from that. Laney, would you agree? Disagree?  
 
Any other perspectives that you'd add from from the Avangrid side? Yeah. And I do appreciate that. I get some time to put my thoughts together. So, thank you, Olivia. And I absolutely agree. And I'll go back, I think, to the two things I had said before that I think as we think about a scalable solution, people, process systems are really important part of that. Right? So people need to understand the intent, and awareness. What is the data? Why am I collecting that data? Do I understand where it's coming from? I think that goes back to workforce as well. I would say, and how that has to get and continue to build, to be built across the organization. Because it will also be driving the decisions and the actions. So I do think that is important. And, and, having been involved in, run a startup company, I think we are, I follow that same model. Right? Like, crawl, walk, run.  
 
And we are in that phase as we think about that scalable solution, that one, that that we can continue to evolve, as the needs and changes and, and requirements change. But that will have to fundamentally scale. Thanks. And, Chet? Any further reflections there? Yeah I mean I agree and things I would go in first but I totally that was a great answer and I agree and I think I'll, I guess I'll add a different perspective to and I think that, as you look out there, there are a couple of things. And I think the workforce is one thing that the structure, I'll say of, of organizations and having to deal with this, like, who's responsibility is it as you think about it? I think the importance of ESG, in terms of governance, the social element of this, the competitive element of this for companies, it doesn't not so in the energy space, it's a little bit different. But but still there is an element there that says, how do I articulate to my stakeholders what I'm doing, like and how I'm looking at this problem long term?  
 
It's so reporting is one element of it getting the data and understand that it's one element of it. But having the the ability to put together and formulate that strategy, I'll just say as a business. But ultimately, you know, in businesses there's a structure, there's an organization, and there's a responsibility of who does that and whether it's a, chief sustainability office or wherever that is. But being able to articulate that out, even if we're not there yet, even if we don't have that, but, you know, saying how you're going to use technology, how you can use things like digital twin, like AI, things like that, and solidify making your stakeholders feel better about where you're going. I think that is kind of how the future direction is kind of probably stating right now, because I agree with Laney. It's kind of a crawl, walk, run, but can you be smart enough as a business to say, these are this is how we're looking at it is how we're going to do it. Here's how we're starting. We're going to develop where you get the data like this now, but ultimately, here's how it's affecting our strategy plan forward and how it's going to change our company. And you know how we're going to make an impact on our customers. And the globe. I think that's the main thing.  
 
So Yeah, and Chet, just to add on that. That crawl, walk, run assumes you're consistently going in the direction in one direction. Right. Which is right. Yeah. Yeah. You know different speed just a different speed. But theoretically it's the same place. Exactly. And I think, you know, you guys probably can speak to it more your experience and where you sit in the ecosystem. That's what we've seen in the energy space a lot. You know, there have been folks where they they lead faster, they go a little faster. And they take the leap out there. And then the rest of the, the, the, the ecosystem tends to line up to that, including suppliers or providers or technology within that. So, but can we do it together? Can we get on this journey together? Learn what we need to learn, and say, okay, here's how we solve today's problems. But here's how we're going to look at it in the future. These are the things we're going to really need you guys to help us with the technology folks, these things. And this is how we're going to look at it. And here's the folks in our organization to work with right. That's the key. Right. That they know and sincerely. And I think suggestions there as well for, for folks listening.  
 
My last question then is, is essentially going to ask, for what you're more call to action would be on an external level. So in terms of looking at policymakers or the wider industry so far, you know, a call to action to help improve and quality, improve the quality and reporting, and ensure compliance, basically. And just to give everyone a, a couple of minutes to think on that, ultimately to, to frame that within the discussion today, we've looked at four key things, right? So we've looked at, the data itself and this notion that perhaps know it's critical that we do get good quality data, but the specific accuracy of that may actually, not not be the most vital thing if we're moving in the right direction. We then looked at what workforce, and the idea was kind of this is being a new and an emerging kind of area. And if anyone is looking for, for a job, for life, then then this is potentially one of those areas to go into. Regulation, obviously hugely challenging. We could go into in a lot more detail, but I think that international variants is, again, another big challenge facing, and then technology as well as a, as a vital solution, but also an area where a lot more can still be done and there's a lot more adoption to take place. So for kind of key big challenges there.  
 
Chet, we'll come to you first. In terms of your call to action, for the industry or for policy makers in this space, how would you, how do you close this out? Yeah, I would I think we touched on it earlier about the, the forms and groups that, that are that are out there. And I think that is really key. I think, being able to tackle and participation in those, as a business, as a company, as an individual, I think those are super important to us in the long term. There's things that we do every day, and it's we're trying to solve the problem that's right in front of our face every day. But when you think about participating in these broader elements of the ecosystem, and webinars like this and forums like this and understanding where things are going and then making an impact to those that I think is going to help us drive this forward, I really do. I think it's it's it's those elements because I think those are the places where people, really decide that these are the ways we need it.  
 
These are how we can solve problems. These are how we can, make better calculations, more accurate, or solve problems with understanding our our direction, our strategy and how we get there faster. So I think that that would be my call to action is really try to lean in to those, those groups and forums, wherever they might be, wherever you might be in the globe, and then participate in those to help your organization plan for the future on where all these things intersect, because they will intersect at some point, they will intersect. And that's where where you want to be and really wanted to have thought about that. So So, Awesome. Laney, could build on to build on that or to add an additional point, I'll come to you. Yeah, I mean, I think, I would say a couple of things. I mean, I wanted to, to echo something Chet said, and that is the being able to clearly articulate the data. What it says, how that supports credibility is really important.  
 
And I would also say kind of very related to that. If you haven't started, you should, because being able to articulate what your strategy is, where you're going there is absolutely. I mean, and Olivia touched on this, the amount of questions that we are getting, I think are I feel like they're doubling every quarter. Stakeholders want this information. You need to be able to articulate where you are, what actions you're taking in that journey. You know, fundamentally, don't forget this is about decarbonization. So in that journey to decarbonize and and so, you know, start to understand, start to build awareness in your organization if you haven't already done so. But laying, laying out that that path, I think is super important. Absolutely. And Olivia, to, to close us out with some some final thoughts. Call to action. I, I really think that the idea of the words Chet used around ecosystem and impact are really important. And the word Laney was using in context because I think that my goal is to encourage people to focus on outcome rather than output.  
 
Reporting is a means to an end, and if the reporting is not serving the desired outcome, then that's when you need to start questioning things. Brilliant, brilliant. And I think a lovely way to wrap us up, as I say, a huge amount of questions that we weren't able to get to today. Both that I wanted to pose, but also from the audience as well. So it's very much a continued conversation. We'll send out the report to everybody after this if you haven't seen it already. And thanks all, of course, for for tuning in. Particular thanks, of course, to Olivia, to Laney, and to Chet for joining us today and sharing their expertise and experiences. It's been fascinating for me and I'm sure fascinating for everyone else on the call as well. Special thanks to GE Vernova for teaming up with us for this report. As I say, findings will be sent out. That's all we have time for. We hope to see everyone again soon. And. Yeah, on to the next one. Thank you. Thank you.