Timeframe and Ambition

Having locked down the boundaries and the accounting math, the SBTi now evaluates the absolute core of the commitment: over what incredibly tight timeframe must the target be achieved, and exactly how brutal must the reductions be?

Criteria C13 through C21 dictate the exact specifications that earn the "science-based" label. A target with a flawless inventory will instantly fail validation if its ambition trajectory is too weak to survive 1.5C.

Timeframe: The 5-to-10 Year Window (C13)

C13 strictly establishes a rigid temporal window for near-term targets. Targets must cover a minimum of 5 years and an absolute maximum of 10 years from the date of official submission. The chosen base year cannot be older than 2015.

The SBTi recently introduced R7, heavily recommending that companies universally select 2030 as their target year, which exempts them from the rigid 5-to-10 year mathematical window.

Forward-Looking Ambition (C14)

C14 viciously closes the "coasting" loophole. If a company brilliantly reduced massive emissions between 2015 and 2024, it cannot set a lazy 2030 target that allows it to essentially coast on its previous achievements.

The forward-looking trajectory from the company's absolute most recent inventory year must be mathematically steep enough to violently crash to net-zero by 2050. The company must continue destroying emissions relentlessly.

Scope 1 and 2 Ambition: The 1.5C Minimum (C15 & C16)

C15 forces the ultimate ambition floor: Scope 1 and 2 near-term targets absolutely must align with the brutally steep decarbonization required to keep global temperatures strictly below 1.5C.

Under C16, companies using absolute reduction targets must adopt the terrifyingly steep Linear Annual Reduction (LAR) rate of at least 4.2% per year across the cross-sector pathway.

Scope 1 and 2 Intensity Requirements (C17)

Some incredibly aggressive industries physically cannot cut absolute emissions while rapidly scaling global infrastructure. C17 strictly permits intensity targets (reducing CO2 per tonne of product) solely if the SBTi has approved a hyper-specific 1.5C sectoral pathway for that exact industry (e.g., steel, power generation, cement).

A software company absolutely cannot use intensity metrics to mask its expanding corporate footprint; it must use absolute reductions.

Scope 3 Ambition: Well-Below 2C Minimum (C18)

C18 mandates that Scope 3 near-term targets must mathematically align with at least a "well-below 2C" trajectory.

This asymmetry (1.5C for Scope 1, well-below 2C for Scope 3) perfectly reflects the terrifying reality that corporations lack direct operational control over their massive global supply chains.

Supplier Engagement Targets (C19)

Many global corporations conquer their Scope 3 obligations by deploying C19 engagement targets instead of direct reduction math. Rather than reducing tonnes itself, the massive buyer legally forces its suppliers to set their own SBTi targets.

C19 enforces four incredibly rigid rules:

1. Boundary: Covers massive upstream or downstream categories.
2. Formulation: Must legally state the exact percentage of emissions (or spend) covered.
3. Timeframe: Must violently execute within a massive 5-year maximum window. (A company setting a 2035 corporate target still must force its suppliers to comply by 2030).
4. Ambition Level: The targeted suppliers absolutely must commit to 1.5C-aligned SBTi near-term criteria themselves.

Renewable Electricity Targets (C21)

As a powerful alternative to complex Scope 2 emission reduction math, C21 allows companies to set breathtaking renewable electricity procurement targets. The thresholds are utterly uncompromising:

• 80% renewable electricity physically procured by 2025.
• 100% renewable electricity physically procured by 2030.