How data restrictions slow climate progress

Imagine running a business without access to key financial data. No revenue reports. No market trends. No balance sheet. Now imagine making high-stakes, long-term decisions - without access to climate data? That's exactly what's happening in the U.S. right now. 🚨 Climate data is vanishing from federal websites - silently and systematically 🚨 Air quality data is no longer being shared internationally - impeding global responses 🚨 Government agencies are erasing all references to climate change - undermining informed decision-making The impact? Climate risks become harder to assess and even harder to address. No data means no action. No action means more vulnerability (not just for businesses, but for real people like you and me!). Here's the reality: climate impacts continue regardless of politics. 🌪️ Extreme weather disrupts supply chains - no matter who's in office (natural disasters caused losses of US$ 320bn in 2024) 📈 Savvy investors still demand climate disclosure - the logic hasn't changed 📉 Employees and customers demand climate action - now more than ever (85% of consumers say climate change affects their daily lives and buying decisions) At AimHi Earth, we've immersed teams at Unilever, PepsiCo and 40 other organisations in learning experiences that enable them to better understand and identify climate risks, spot future-proofing opportunities and make better business decisions in a changing world. So, given what’s happening in the States, we are launching a "pay what you can" initiative for US-based SMBs and non-profits - those who need this information most. Because access to essential climate information should be hampered by politics.

In 2025, there was no single day where the global temperature was cooler than the 1991-2020 average, according to new data released by the EU's Copernicus ECMWF. In other words, we are experiencing climate change on a daily basis. The new data shows that the globe has warmed 1.4°C (above pre-industrial). We will bulldoze through the Paris Agreement goal by May 2029, if warming continues at the same rate. And yet EU policymakers believe it is a good idea to exempt 90% of companies from reporting on their Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions under the #CSRD. This is difficult to reconcile with the scale and urgency of the challenge. Data collection does not reduce emissions on its own. But without it, companies are flying blind when it comes to understanding and reducing their carbon footprint.

The Tragedy of the Tragedy of the Horizon Timely piece by Responsible Investor Elza Holmstedt Pell. Ten years after Governor Mark Carney’s speech on #climaterisk, little transformative action has followed. Carney’s intervention did succeed in putting climate on the risk maps of central bankers and financial institutions. But he never called for transformative tools such as #carbonpricing. Instead, he assumed that a soft approach based on disclosure would be enough to steer capital markets toward climate alignment. In Europe, that wager has been taken to extremes. Goodwill and budget have been consumed in an upside-down inflation of reporting requirements, with obligations imposed on investors before investee companies. This has created fertile ground for the weaponisation of “administrative simplification” (#omnibus) by parties and interests linked to fossil fuels, just as the #ESRS extended reporting obligations to large non-financial companies. The irony is that just as better models emerge to quantify the mounting physical risks of inaction, delays and scope reductions are restricting the very data they require. Emboldened by these victories, fossil fuel–aligned politicians and their appointees, in the US and in Europe, are no longer content with delay and dilution. They are openly pushing for the dismantling of #sustainabilityreporting. If Europe is to reconcile competitiveness, resilience and ambition, it must not only preserve meaningful double-materiality reporting, but also recognise that disclosure alone was never the answer. Clear and costly political signals are needed to accelerate the transition.

When I founded Planet FWD, I made a clear commitment democratize access to high quality supply chain data. GHG inventories and LCAs are foundational tools for sustainability teams and our vision has always been for these tools to be accessible to all. It hasn’t been easy but my team has made it possible for every company to measure, report and reduce their emissions with integrity and transparency. That's why I'm increasingly concerned by a trend in our industry - providers telling companies their existing carbon data "can't be accepted.” When providers tell you to discard your existing carbon measurements and start over, they're not just asking you to duplicate work. They're asking you to: 1. Waste valuable resources. 2. Lock yourself into closed systems that limit your future options. 3. Delay real progress. The reality is simple: If your emissions data follows recognized methodological standards like GHG Protocol and ISO LCA, it should be usable across platforms and frameworks. At Planet FWD , we believe in open collaboration and interoperability. That means accepting emissions data from any verified provider that meets quality standards. Because the path to decarbonization requires all of us working together. We shared more thoughts on this in our latest blog post (link in comments) The climate crisis is too urgent for gatekeeping. Let's focus on progress, not proprietary limitations. #Sustainability #ClimateAction #NetZero #OpenData #Collaboration

🌍It's not new news: The impact of blocking climate data in federal documents Recent reports about efforts to block the release of climate data from federal documents & websites are deeply concerning. Access to accurate, transparent, and comprehensive climate data is critical for informed decision-making—not just for governments, but for businesses, individuals, and global organisations alike. If this move goes ahead (or continues to), the ripple effects could be significant. I’ve stepped through my thoughts but mostly I'm keen to understand how others are remaining positive with these changes? 🏢 Impact on Businesses🏢 Businesses rely on federal climate data to assess risks, plan for the future, and align with sustainability goals. Without access to this information, companies may struggle to: 👎 Understand and mitigate climate-related risks to their operations and supply chains. 👎 Make informed investments in clean energy and sustainable practices. 👎 Meet regulatory requirements and stakeholder expectations around environmental transparency. Industries like insurance, agriculture, energy, and real estate—which are heavily dependent on climate data for risk modeling and long-term planning—could be hit the hardest. 🙅♀️ Impact on Individuals🙅♀️ For individuals, the lack of accessible climate data could mean: 😞 Reduced ability to make informed decisions about where to live, work, or invest. 😞 Limited understanding of local climate risks, such as flooding, wildfires, or extreme weather events. 😞 Fewer opportunities to hold policymakers and corporations accountable for climate action. 🌎 Impact on Global Climate Organisations🌎 Global organisations like the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) and UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) rely on robust, reliable data to inform their analyses and recommendations. Blocking access to U.S. federal climate data could: 💡 Create gaps in global climate models, undermining their accuracy and usefulness. 💡 Hinder the ability to track progress toward international climate goals, such as the Paris Agreement. 💡 Limit the effectiveness of global efforts to address climate change, as data from the U.S. is a critical component of worldwide analysis. While global organisations may still publish their findings, the absence of U.S. federal data could weaken the credibility and comprehensiveness of their reports. This could lead to delays, increased uncertainty, and a lack of consensus on critical climate issues. It is sad because this is yet another barrier on what was already a difficult road. What positives can we take? How do we remain hopeful? #ClimateAction #Sustainability #Climatedata #Transparency #BusinessImpact #carbon Trace | Certified B Corp™

Today in Nature News: “Through actions such as firing of US federal scientists en masse, blocking clean-energy incentives and abandoning international climate commitments, the administration of US president Donald Trump is hobbling the country’s efforts to reduce its contribution to global warming. As courts start to assess the legality of some of Trump’s policies, the uncertainty is hampering climate- and energy-related programmes and businesses. “There’s been a viciousness that I hadn’t anticipated in tearing everything down without a coherent plan for what to build back up,” says atmospheric scientist Daniel Cohan. Meanwhile, a coalition of nonprofit groups, archivists and researchers are working to ensure that the federal environmental data they rely on remains available to the public. Research librarian Alejandro Paz and policy scholar Eric Nost, who belong to the Public Environmental Data Partners network, have written an overview of where US government data is disappearing, how to find it and how to save it.”