with Rohan Graham, Head of Asset Data, National Grid and Jay Chen, Data Process Administrator, IT&D Data Engineering and Process, NGED

Data sharing is key for reaching our net zero targets; this is something IB1’s strategic partner National Grid Electricity Distribution (NGED) has long recognised. And, as the company looks to cement its position as a digital leader in the energy industry, IB1 remains a key component and catalyst in accelerating its digitalisation journey. 

We caught up with Rohan Graham from National Grid and Jay Chen from NGED, to discuss how interoperability across Distribution Network Operators (DNOs) is fundamental to unlocking the potential of open data in the energy sector.

Building trusted open data

Last year, NGED identified a need to improve how it publishes assured open data. While the DNO had already established an open data portal, it wanted to review both what it was publishing and how it was publishing it. This shift signalled a commitment to providing data that is trusted, consistent and usable across the sector. 

“Our goal is to contribute to the broader movement of publishing interoperable assured open data, explore genuine shared-data use cases, and understand how to make that data available securely through trust frameworks, while considering and aligning to the DSI under development.” Rohan Graham. 

Sector-wide collaboration

NGED sits within a much wider ecosystem of UK DNOs, all of which publish similar datasets. Because these datasets are used across the energy sector, (not just within each DNO’s own business) ensuring their interoperability is essential.

To achieve the level of interoperability required and to build sector-wide collaboration, harmonisation is essential. Once in place, the value of this interoperability is far-reaching: it strengthens trust, encourages the wider use of data across the sector and ultimately accelerates the entire sector’s digital maturity. 

“Over the next 3-5 years, we’ll see the increase of interoperability of data between organisations as well as the increasing use of flexibility services across multiple DNOs.” Jay Chen, NGED. 

Data Action

The Data (Use and Access) Act might also be a catalyst for positive change in the sector. Its focus on the roll-out of smart data schemes is a move in the right direction. But, whether this alone will galvanise the sector toward a more connected, net-zero future remains to be seen.

“It’s definitely a positive move. It’s set up some of the frameworks for how Open Energy can be pushed forward, but really, the Act alone won’t create immediate change. Specific to Open Energy, the real push comes from facilitation by Icebreaker One, a common purpose and active participation from members of the ecosystem.” 

Rohan Graham, National Grid

IB1: The great facilitator 

Through our Open Energy programme, IB1 has helped to establish best practices for publishing open data; focusing on machine readability, standardised metadata and overall consistency; all of which help to facilitate trust across the sector. 

“Working with IB1 has been really valuable in providing awareness, guidance, and direction, mainly from an open data perspective, so far. One of the biggest benefits has been driving the collaboration between the DNOs through steering and working groups. This kind of collaboration is crucial for progressing interoperability and shared best practices”. Rohan Graham.

“Our strategic partnership enables NGED to have a driving seat in shaping the future of decarbonisation through working groups with sector organisations, facilitated by IB1.”

Jay Chen, NGED

What’s next?

Looking ahead, National Grid is set to continue its progress toward a more connected, digital energy system. Central to achieving this vision is the ability to continue identifying datasets that truly move the dial on flexible energy markets and decarbonisation.

“Understanding who needs that data, why they need it, and how to deliver it securely and at scale will be key. The sector needs to  remain focused on publishing what truly drives progress toward net zero – whether that’s open or shared data.” Rohan Graham. 

IB1’s work in Open Energy is creating a connected web of energy data – making it more discoverable, interoperable, and impactful, in the collective mission to reach net zero.

If you’re interested in becoming a Strategic Partner, an Open Energy member, or part of our expert network, you can join us at ib1.org/join or reach out at partners@ib1.org to start a conversation about unlocking data for net zero.

SME decarbonisation depends on better data

Accurate Scope 2 emissions data—the indirect emissions from purchased electricity—sit at the heart of SME decarbonisation and green financing decisions. But most Scope 2 calculations rely on crude annual accounting that masks the reality of how electricity grids actually work.

What’s more, electricity demand and renewable generation don’t align neatly across a calendar year – they shift hour by hour. An SME might be using an energy tariff that’s marketed as “100% renewable” on an annual basis while consuming fossil fuel power during winter evenings when solar isn’t generating. That gap matters for real decarbonisation, and it matters for lenders assessing genuine progress toward Net Zero.

Making clean power visible

Matched Energy is an independent, not-for-profit energy transparency initiative. It analyses publicly available data using a peer-reviewed methodology to calculate how well renewable supply aligns with consumption on a half-hourly basis—the finest granularity supported by UK electricity settlement systems.

Their groundbreaking Clean Power Index published on October 27th, puts vital information in the hands of consumers. The index underscores the need for regulatory reform of the existing opaque rules that allow suppliers to make misleading “100% renewable” marketing claims.

This level of precision transforms Scope 2 accounting from an annual figure into something actionable: SMEs can see when they’re actually getting clean power, and lenders can assess the physical reality behind carbon claims.

Open Energy & Perseus

Open Energy is creating a connected web of energy data while Perseus is automating sustainability reporting for UK SMEs in order to unlock access to green finance. At its core, Perseus makes it easy to share accurate, assurable emissions data that sits behind carbon calculations—enabling better analysis, action and impact.

Through this collaboration half-hourly renewable matching data will be integrated with carbon accounting platforms and other interested parties across the ecosystem. It will enable SMEs and their stakeholders to access more granular, assurable data about electricity consumption and its true carbon intensity.

By connecting Matched Energy’s temporal analysis to Perseus’s data infrastructure, we’re creating pathways for carbon accountants, lenders, and corporate energy buyers to make better-informed decisions based on the physical reality of the grid.

“The result of this collaboration is more reliable emissions reporting, better decarbonisation decisions, and stronger foundations for green finance. The data infrastructure already exists—what’s needed is the connection between the systems that hold it. Open Energy is building that connection and we’re pleased to have Matched Energy as part of that effort”. Gavin Starks, CEO, IB1

Date: 7th May 2025 10:00-11:30 BST

Location: online

Co-Chairs: Gavin Starks, IB1; Claire Reid, Barclays 

Secretariat: IB1

The meeting aims were as follows: 

1. Alignment on scope, priorities, decisions
2. Endorsement of the approach
3. Agreement on deadlines to identify and connect us with in-house peers

Summary:

• It was noted that:
  • AG1 meetings are being restructured to be shorter, and focus on decision making and steering. Workshops will be held as our ‘getting things done’ mechanism. 
  • Development Bank Wales announcement has been published showcasing using Perseus in their due diligence process: https://ib1.org/2025/05/06/development-bank-of-wales-uses-perseus-in-green-lending 
  • AG1’s 2025 priorities are to:
    • articulate the commercial value of financial products, market readiness, and segmentation
    • engage and identify stakeholders across your organisation so we can help with internal communication and readiness
    • prioritise next product category of GHG data and business use case
    • agree 2025 case studies and collaborate with AG4 to share 
  • It is crucial we know who the internal stakeholders are who need to be brought in at the right time.
• It was agreed that:
  • Gas will be the data type we should prioritise next, with waste generation as the second chosen option.
  • Sustainability Linked-Loans (SLL) and use of proceeds are the product focuses prioritised for investigation.
• It was discussed that:
  • A benefit of use of proceeds is it should be available in most FSPs and we don’t have to think about building new frameworks of SLL while adding a new level of complexity. 
  • There are ways use of proceeds can be further disaggregated and show how to  demonstrate the value of Perseus for wider portfolio monitoring and reporting.

Next meeting date: 10-10:30 24th July 2025

Formal records are maintained by the secretariat. These are confidential to the Advisory Group Members.

“There’s two ways to tackle this issue; either through supply options like reservoirs or through demand management. And, with a 5 billion litres per day gap to 2050 across the UK, regulators are saying half of this will be achieved through demand management.” Lina Nieto, Water Net Zero Manager, at Affinity Water

Water Neutrality 

Water neutrality, which involves reducing the water footprint from activities as much as  possible, is an example of demand management. Water companies and developers can, together, ensure that new developments are built as efficiently as possible, for example, by installing fittings to prevent leakage. But this is only one part of a multifaceted problem. A lot of the issues surrounding water use can be boiled down to behaviour and our perception of water. 

“Lots of water is being wasted because no one really looks at a water bill in the same way they look at an energy bill or a mobile phone bill. The challenge really comes down to the way that people perceive water.” 

Project Zero

Lina and her team recognised the behavioural element that comes into play with water usage, leveraging this in their water neutrality campaign, Project Zero. Using a combination of customer behavioural change, technology installation and offsetting, Project Zero’s goal was to bring down water consumption across three sites covering around 1,000 homes each in ‘Bidwell West’ in Houghton Regis, Bedfordshire. 

“In our supply area, new properties are expected to use an extra 83.03 million litres of water a day by 2032, on top of what is already being used. By working with behavioural change specialists, we created pledges for people to commit to and found that almost 100% of people stuck to their pledge and successfully changed their behaviour in relation to water usage”. 

These pledges helped people to quantify the amount of water they use and ultimately the amount of water they could save through small, everyday changes. One example is turning the tap off while brushing your teeth, which can save 20 litres of water. And, while the project found that behaviour change alone could reduce water use by an average of 24.9 litres per household, people still need to use water. To achieve water neutrality, the project also set about offsetting water consumption in non-households like schools and businesses. 

“Water offsetting is in its infancy with different geographical approaches being trialled to achieve offsetting targets, and buildings of social value are being prioritised. This first, very localised approach, ensured that the water used by new homes and its offsetting, is linked to the same water source.”

Government attitudes

Government attitudes to the water sector have also played their part in the industry’s apparent lack of progress: “We’re ten years behind the energy sector. Water is cheap, people take it for granted and so it hasn’t had the same focus that the energy sector has. We weren’t even part of the government’s net zero roadmap, which is surprising because water is a very energy intensive industry”. 

But, with a parliamentary refresh in the shape of a new Labour government, there have been some more positive signs. A new Water (Special Measures) Bill was laid out in the King’s Speech, part of which referenced a requirement to install ‘real-time monitors at every sewage outlet, with data independently scrutinised by the water regulators’.

A smart move

As the project pushes to the next phase, it plans to move away from the time-consuming process of manual meter readings, instead choosing to install smart meters. Smart meters provide a more granular and timely view of water usage, as well as saving time and money when compared to manual readings:

“While costly, installing smart meters has proved worth the outlay, as taking manual readings is time-consuming and costs money. The data quality of smart meters is more reliable with a granular level of data, which supports the understanding of the impact of the campaign.” 

The report entitled ‘SME Finance Taskforce – Smart Data: improving SME lending to drive economic growth’ outlines a 7-point plan that hinges on Smart Data:

1. Prioritise the Digital Information and Smart Data Bill
2. Fund and support an SME “Smart Data Challenge”
3. Review and improve HM Treasury’s Bank Referral and Commercial Credit Data
   Sharing (CCDS) schemes
4. Accelerate reform of Companies House, in particular standardisation and verification
   of Company information such as directors’ names
5. Unlock private sector data by providing information from HMRC e.g. digital receipt of
   VAT owed to match and verify cloud accounting data. In addition, allow greater
   access to HMRC data for approved organisations
6. Develop and consult on proposals for an e-invoicing scheme for the UK to align with
   overseas markets
7. Enable greater trust in using new specialist lenders e.g., through industry initiatives.

Access the full report here.

“Legislation is a really powerful tool, as it removes the argument on whether the data should or can be collected, replacing it with the fact that the law says this is how it’s going to be’’. Nic Granger, Director of Corporate, North Sea Transition Authority.

You might expect a radical change in a sector’s approach to data could be met with some resistance, but this was not the case. Instead, organisations now had a legal requirement to fulfil, including the need for a named individual to hold these responsibilities, meaning data management teams were given the budget and attention they’d been asking for. And now, the regulatory foresight shown by the NSTA has led to far-reaching benefits in sectors such as carbon capture and storage (CCS), hydrogen, offshore wind and oil & gas. 

Carbon Capture and Storage

The NSTA’s mission is to accelerate the energy transition, support emissions reduction and ensure the UK maintains a secure supply of energy. This involves regulating and influencing industries spanning oil & gas, offshore hydrogen and carbon capture and storage (CCS). 

CCS (the process of capturing and storing carbon dioxide emissions and storing them, often underground or within rock formations) is seen by many as a critical component of the UK’s net zero strategy:

“We see carbon capture and storage having a significant impact on the energy transition. The 21 licences that we issued in September, could capture ten percent of UK carbon emissions,” says Granger, “and the six licences which were in place before that could add even greater capacity.”.  

The previous government set a target to store 20-30 million tonnes of CO2 by 2030. And, while the plans of the newly-elected Government remain to be seen, the first round of CCS projects critical to meeting these targets are due for a final investment decision in the near future.

Seismic Data

One type of data, previously used for oil and gas projects, is now proving its worth in CCS. By helping to identify geological formations and assess storage capacity, seismic data is immensely valuable in CCS, highlighted by the fact that the NSTA’s data downloads increased 20-fold on the day the CCS licensing round opened. 

Now, following an announcement in the 2023 Energy Act, the NSTA has the power to collect carbon storage data from industry. Again, demonstrating its proactive approach to data governance as the CCS industry begins to pick up speed.

The value of seismic data stretches beyond the confines of the CCS sector however, it includes the top 100 metres of geological data, making it ideal for siting offshore wind farms:

“In 2015, the government funded two large chunks of seismic data. That data was intended to be used for oil and gas but what we’re now seeing is the data being reprocessed and used for offshore wind, another crucial pillar for energy transition in the UK.”

Democratising Data

Another type of data showing promising benefits across industries is GIS (geographic information system) data. Primarily generated through regulatory transactions, and made openly available by the NSTA, GIS data is helping to identify existing oil and gas infrastructure such as pipelines. These pipelines then have the potential to be repurposed for use in hydrogen or carbon dioxide transportation.

“This data is available on the equivalent of an open government licence, so it’s an open NSTA licence. We’ve now had over 500 million spatial server requests, roughly 2 million hits a week. The data is great from a spatial planning point of view, and it really helps to explain the importance of data when you can see it visually.”

By opening up datasets like these, the NSTA is also helping to democratise data and reduce costs. This allows academics to access datasets that were previously too expensive for their research budgets. Armed with these datasets, academics can then research ways to phase out fossil fuels and achieve net zero, faster. But, having large quantities of data is one thing, in order to truly reap the benefits of open data, it must be high quality.  

“Our approach is to open up as much data as we can. There’s a huge volume of industry data available under the NSTA’s NDR user agreement but the ownership is retained by industry. We have over a petabyte of data and we’re now ensuring new data loaded is high quality and machine readable.”

This in-depth report details Icebreaker One’s work during the Alpha Phase of the project with a specific focus on data sharing, accessibility and interoperability. It explores three core pillars of work:

• Reviewing the data landscape supporting NIMBUS
• Evaluating dataset applicability to NIMBUS
• Convening expert input to guide the project and ensure transferability to the wider energy sector and beyond.

Download our data accessibility and interoperability report here

Aligned with our ethos of collaboration: ‘to go far, we go together’, they contribute to our mission of making data work harder to reach net zero. Now we want to highlight some of the important work they do for both people and the planet.

This week, I speak with Melissa Tallack, Managing Director of C2Life and co-lead on the Stream initiative. The conversation covers our ever-changing relationship with water as well as looking at the water sector’s journey into open data. We also discuss the important decision to value encouragement over mandates and to champion collaboration over siloed work.

Ross: Hi Mellisa, thanks so much for taking the time to speak to me. Could you start by giving me an idea of your background in the water sector and your journey so far?

Melissa: I joined the water industry off the back of its privatisation. Privatisation was in 1989 and I joined in 1993. I first joined Anglian Water, only planning to stay for a couple of years, but I discovered that there’s a lot to do in the water sector. I’ve been fortunate enough to have a variety of roles from frontline operations to scientific to asset management.

The last third of my time at Anglian Water was spent in the world of data and information. The reason I stepped into that role was because, in 2014, a regulation change came into place that required us to make different investment decisions. It meant not just looking at capital expenditure (CAPEX) and operating expenditure (OPEX) but now also total cost of expenditure (TOTEX). Data became critical here, as you need more and more reliable information to make these decisions. 

There was also a strong feeling in the sector that the data we had wasn’t up to standard, everybody felt it was either bad or simply not good enough. And yet, no one was really prepared to step forward and do anything about it. Myself and a couple of colleagues then started leading a piece of work around enterprise information management to solve that challenge. That sort of began my career in data and my interest in data as a fundamental resource in the company.

Following this, I went on to stand up an alliance of partners to work alongside Anglian Water in tackling the challenges of enterprise information management. I ended up running the data service and digital service within Anglian Water which modernised big data analytics platforms as well as modernising a lot of technology and practices within Anglian Water. 

During that time we were increasingly thinking, if we only use our own company data to answer these questions, we’re going to end up with a very siloed view of the world. We wanted to bring in external data sets and open data sets, but we also believed that by publishing our own data sets, we could get more eyes on the problem. Getting that diversity of thought was key and we were already used to being challenged from the outside in, so it kind of felt like a natural progression.

At the same time Northumbrian Water were gathering like-minded people together to talk about open data. They shared our view that this was the way forward but agreed it would be better if we all did it together. We got enough indication to suggest it was valuable and we then set our eyes on securing some funding to enable us to build out this thing which would enable open data for the sector. This marked the beginning of ‘Stream’. 

Ross: It’s fascinating to hear the journey that the water sector has been on and your place in it! Could you help me understand the Stream initiative better?

Melissa: What we’re trying to do with Stream is lower the barrier to publication as much as possible. It doesn’t matter how rough and ready it is or if you can’t connect to it programmatically, we will get there and we’ll build that capability together within the consortium of water companies. What’s important is getting data out there. I understand that people are reluctant to release data because they might be worried about it being the right format. But some data is better than none. That is definitely the philosophy we’re adopting. We’ll learn through doing, we’ll learn what people value and we’ll improve our own capability as a sector by doing this. But you have to start somewhere. It’s about building a two-way conversation with your community of users. You have to encourage, you can’t mandate.

In terms of datasets it’s very early days and so far, we’ve only released three datasets. One of those is a very foundational dataset that focuses on the boundaries between water companies. The other one that’s been published is drinking water quality. Traditionally, people would have to go to a company website and enter in a postcode to get a value for that postcode, which is useful if you want to look at one data point, but actually not very useful if you want to look at this compared to elsewhere in the region or in another water company. Now, by publishing historical drinking water quality data, you are able to do that comparison. Having said that, it’s a downloadable data set and not one that you can connect to programmatically. So I think that will probably limit the use of that data.

Ross: So it seems like there needs to be transparency not only of the data but also transparency and honesty in the ways we approach it? Where do you envision the key benefits coming from in the Stream initiative?  

Melissa: I think the environment is probably going to be a key beneficiary because that’s where a lot of the focus is. And, I hope it is, because the fundamental hypothesis behind opening water company data is to encourage transparency and trust and to drive innovation. By helping the environment, these benefits should trickle down to helping people and societies because whether we like it or not, we’re all intrinsically linked to the water environment because we rely on clean water to survive. But water companies are just one of the players in the natural environment. We can’t solve that problem alone and we need to rely on other people to work with us. A key ingredient to all of this is people’s willingness to collaborate. 

What’s promising is that we first started talking about this in April 2020. It shows you the level of commitment from the water companies to do this because we’re all still here and we’ve grown in number. In fact, we’ve now got all but two of the UK water companies as members of Stream so it’s great to see an industry actually pulled together like this. Don’t get me wrong, there is a varying spectrum across the water companies but there is certainly a strong willingness to collaborate and do this together because we know the benefits are greater if we’re working as one.

Ross: Do you think our relationship to water and the water sector has changed?

Melissa: Our relationship to water has changed, especially over the last few years. During Covid more people were spending time outside, taking up wild swimming. In fact, I think our relationship to water is always shifting. Water scarcity is certainly an increasing problem in the face of climate change and changing weather patterns, certainly for the vast majority of the UK but in the South especially. It’s here that water consumption and unaccounted for water leakage are key issues to address because we’ve got to have enough water to go around. 

If we’re able to make the operational data more transparent, people can be better informed and make different decisions about what they do with water. As an example, if you knew how you as an individual compared to people who live in the same type of property or have the same demographics and were able to see that information, would you make different decisions? And it’s not only the individuals, but what products and services can be built off the back of that data to help. 

But as I mentioned, there are many other factors and stakeholders involved. We operate in a system of systems. Take energy and water, for example, they have a strong reliance on each other. And while, historically, water has been more reliant on the energy sector, this relationship is beginning to invert. When people think of water, they think about drinking water but people rely on water for a multitude of reasons. And now, you’ve got a large number of hydrogen projects coming up where water is, of course, fundamental. 

Since the MVP launch in December 2023, the Stream partners are working towards a key milestone of delivering a functional platform in April 2024.

March’s AG meeting aimed to:

1. Comment on the go-live criteria to be presented to the Steering Group.
2. Updating the data standards work and metadata standards and signing off on latest change requests.
3. Endorse the recommended metadata standard.
4. Update on Operating Model progress.
5. Demo on Day 1 Platform.
6. Presentation of Trust Framework roadmap.

Key Insights

• An update on the go-live status and criteria was presented, including the minimum requirements for go-live Day 1 and the post-Day 1 criteria, for each workstream.
• Elysia Moore was introduced as Stream’s product owner and AG1 co-chair.
• An update on the Data Standards workstream was presented, including governance and process review.
  • Data Standards are now publicly available on the GitHub repository.
  • Any data standards updates will be proposed by the working group to AG2, then presented to the SG for adoption, before being implemented.
  • The ‘working’ branch of the GitHub repository is where updates are being provided and reviewed.
  • It was discussed that other tools e.g. Gitbook can be reviewed and discussed, to increase accessibility.
• It was agreed that “INSPIRE Metadata Directive” has been chosen as the metadata standard. INSPIRE can be aligned with Dublin Core and used within Gemini 2.3 (UK).
• An update on the Operating Model was presented, including developing BAU processes and governance.
• A demo on the Day 1 platform was delivered.
• The Trust Framework and how to publish assured data in 3 steps (see IB1 webpage) was presented.

Background

Icebreaker One, in partnership with SSEN Transmission, IBM and Palantir, is working on the NIMBUS (Network Innovation and Meteorology to BUild for Sustainability) project, which aims to accelerate the transition to net zero by prolonging the life of energy assets through the introduction of granular weather data sources into the asset risk modelling methodologies. The NIMBUS project is funded by the Ofgem Strategic Innovation Fund (SIF), the SIF is delivered in partnership with Innovate UK.

In this consultation we present key findings from NIMBUS regarding the asset data sharing practices in the UK energy sector and the use of granular weather data as part of the CBRM (Condition Based Risk Management) methodology. 

We seek your input to ensure that we capture a wide range of expertise and views that reflect the data sharing landscape relevant to the NIMBUS use case, specifically pertaining to data on energy asset management. The proposals  presented in this consultation draw from prior NIMBUS project work incorporating desk research, Advisory Groups convening various members of TSO and DNO organisations, and stakeholder interviews to evaluate the current landscape of asset data sharing and the approaches to CBRM in the sector.

Important Details about the Consultation below:

• The consultation is open until 5pm on 12 March 2024. 
• Please submit your responses to: julija.hansena@ib1.org
• In your response , please indicate whether you are happy for your response to be published openly, attributed to you and/or your organisation. 
• If confidentiality is requested, your submission will be anonymised when Icebreaker One publishes their response. Please email Julija to discuss if you have specific anonymity requirements. 
• Comments are particularly encouraged from all transmission system operators (TSOs) and distribution network operators (DNOs) in the energy sector, however responses from utilities with similar assets such as water, rail and telecommunications are also welcomed.
  

Proposal

Through analysis of data gathered via Advisory Groups, stakeholder interviews and desk research, we have identified the following approaches to asset data sharing and the use of CBRM in the energy sector:

Statement 1

The sector is generally embracing the concepts of open data and data sharing, especially since the publication of Ofgem’s Data Best Practice Guidance which promotes data sharing and reuse. Many TSOs and DNOs have created their own open data portals (e.g. SSEN-T Open Data Portal, SSEN-D Data Portal), however there is still a noticeable lack of shared data standards, methodologies and tools that govern asset data sharing in this sector.

Questions about Statement 1: 

1. What is your organisation’s experience of sharing asset data?
2. Are there any data standards, methodologies or tools that are used in your organisation to facilitate data sharing and publication of this type of data? 

Statement 2

CBRM is a widely utilised methodology across the energy sector to facilitate asset risk management and reporting. However, asset managers report that it is somewhat limited in its approach and may well benefit from integrating weather data experienced locally by assets into the asset risk modelling process. Project NIMBUS aims to address this by assisting to integrate granular weather data into asset risk assessment methodologies, with the aim of optimising asset inspection schedules and subsequently reducing asset degradation and the associated costs.

Questions about Statement 2: 

3. In your organisation, are weather conditions experienced by assets currently integrated into the asset risk assessment methodologies?
4. If so, have you been able to measure and quantify the impact this has had on your asset inspection and maintenance cycles and the associated costs?

Statement 3

TSOs and DNOs handle large volumes of data of various levels of sensitivities, which need to be handled appropriately. In order to assist with data security, as well as enable data sharing between organisations, a framework like data sensitivity classes can be applied. For the NIMBUS use case, SSEN-T Open Data Portal makes use of a data triage process which is applied to all SSEN-T datasets prior to publication, with the results of the triage processes being published here. The data sensitivity classification framework that forms part of this triage process is closely aligned with IB1’s data sensitivity classes, whilst simultaneously adopting the classes to fit the needs of the business.

Questions about Statement 3: 

5. Are there any existing data triage processes or frameworks that aid in assessing data sensitivity levels of asset data in your organisation? 
6. Are they based on any existing processes or frameworks?

How can you help?

We are seeking responses to the 6 questions listed in the ‘Proposal’ section above. It should take no more than 30 minutes to respond. The consultation is open until 5pm UK on 12 March 2024 and responses are encouraged from all transmission system operators and distribution network operators in the energy sector, as well as adjacent organisations working on matters relevant to the NIMBUS use case.

To submit your responses, or if you have any queries please email: research@ib1.org

Now, in the midst of COP28, as we await the first Global Stocktake of Paris Agreement emissions targets, our attention is fixed firmly on world leaders, in the hope that real tangible action will be taken.

Navigating a water-stressed world 

The discussion of water in reaching our net-zero goals is a timely one, not least because COP28 is taking place in one of the most water-stressed regions in the world. Indeed, high on the agenda this year is a focus on conserving and restoring freshwater ecosystems, enhancing urban water resilience, and bolstering water-resilient food systems.

This is underscored by the fact that the water sector constitutes approximately 10% of global greenhouse gas emissions, with an investment gap that, according to the World Resources Institute, would require $1.04 trillion annually from 2015 to 2030 to fill.

Icebreaker One’s role

There are a number of data-driven levers we could pull on to help curb emissions in the water sector. But, to really understand its impact, it’s first useful to understand the broad spectrum of data at play. This ranges from data on drinking water quality, which is open and can be accessed by anyone. To data on customer’s financial details, which is closed and can only be accessed internally. In between these, we have data on water network maps which is limited to named access only. 

There’s a clear variability in levels of accessibility when it comes to water data, and Icebreaker One has a firm grasp on this. As part of the Stream initiative, we’ve been working to establish a widely accessible open data platform along with the associated governance and data standards that underpin it. The potential benefits of this are far reaching, unlocking water data for customers, society, and the environment. 

By making UK water industry data openly available, backed by clear data licences and data standards, the Stream initiative will aid academics, innovators and campaigning organisations to analyse and better understand the relationship between water use and climate change. This can then be translated into tools and initiatives to support consumers and businesses to reduce water consumption, minimise water wasted through leaks, and identify and implement solutions for water pollution’. Ceri Stanaway, User needs Researcher, on the Stream programme

Unlocking water data

Making water industry data openly available can improve transparency in the sector, which can help spur on more data-driven decision making. Unpacking this; if all stakeholders across the water sector’s ecosystem can access the necessary data required to understand the potential challenges they face, then new and innovative solutions of ways of working can come to the fore. Collaboration will also be encouraged as policy makers, regulators and businesses gain a better understanding of their shared challenges. 

Collaboration is also a critical component when creating a standardised approach to reporting greenhouse gas emissions in the water sector. Data on greenhouse gas emissions can vary both in terms of availability and accessibility, which can give rise to unreliable emissions targets that are difficult to act upon. More than this, it can lead to organisations underestimating their carbon impact. A standardised approach will help to address these variabilities, pushing the sector to more accurately measure its emissions and achieve its net-zero targets. 

All eyes on COP28

Now, as the UN pushes for more significant emission cuts by 2030, to align with the Paris Agreement, the spotlight intensifies on COP28. We hope as the conference unfolds, more attention will be given to decarbonising the water sector. But more importantly, we hope to see a growing recognition that data is the tool to get us there. The realisation of these net-zero ambitions are not achievable without a tangible blueprint. Icebreaker One and the Stream consortium certainly understand this, with the Stream Open Data Platform (Minimum Viable Product) to launch on 18th December 2023.

Now, in the lead-up to COP28, with a climate emergency on our hands, we want to reinforce this common thread, highlighting why our work is more pertinent than it has ever been. In order to achieve this, we’ll be revisiting past use cases. These demonstrate our action-led work, showing the potential impact better access to data can have, and its critical role in keeping us within the boundaries of the Paris Agreement. 

Insurance

Data lies at the heart of the insurance industry because insurance is at its core, a business of risk management. With data playing a central part in assessing, pricing, and managing this risk. But, data in the insurance industry is often siloed or isolated to bilateral contracts between the insurance company and the policyholder. What’s more, in order to share data, stakeholders in the insurance industry need to navigate issues of trust regarding how their data will be used as well as issues of commercial sensitivity. All this, while operating within the labyrinth of regulations that underpin the industry. Our work with the Standard for Environment, Risk and Insurance (SERI) programme, aimed to bridge these gaps and siloes by establishing a foundation for net-zero underwriting, aligning insurance practices with sustainable objectives.

Building a case for retrofitting

The energy consumption of existing buildings accounts for around 34% of the UK’s annual carbon emissions. What’s more, 80% of buildings in use today will still be in use by 2050, the same year we have pledged to reach our net zero emissions target. Even if we focus on residential housing, of the 28 million homes in the UK, only 40% of these have an EPC rating of C or higher. There is a stark need to retrofit our existing buildings, in order to improve their energy efficiency, decarbonise and reach our net-zero targets.

In the context of insurance for the built environment, data capture often focuses on assessing a building’s resilience to current and future climate risks. In fact, insurers have a very solid understanding of the risks associated with climate change and how those risks can impact buildings and infrastructure. They do this by evaluating how well a building can withstand or adapt to extreme weather events, rising sea levels, increased temperatures, and other consequences of climate change. 

And yet, current short term insurance risk transfer measures are not capable of covering large scale risks caused by long term climate change, in short, the insurance industry lacks a focus on climate change mitigation. And, to adopt this focus, the systemic risks posed by climate change needs be taken into consideration during policy making. This should ensure the industry takes the route of net zero underwriting which, in turn, should incentivise net-zero behaviours from their customers through rewarding better building efficiency and performance. Reciprocally, if policyholders then share data relating to their retrofitting efforts, this information can then be used in underwriting to determine more accurate risk profiles and potential premium reductions. 

A climate-ready building passport

The key outputs of our SERI programme were the creation of an insurance product that would provide value across the insurance ecosystem, helping it factor in climate change mitigation. The insurance product created was a climate-ready building passport (C-RBP). It was designed to address industry shortcomings, paving a way for insurers to bring net zero underwriting into their repertoire and ultimately incentivise net zero behaviours like retrofitting. 

The C-RBP pools together the physical, environmental, financial, risk and regulatory data of a building in digital form. But more than this, it incorporates data points not widely used in building insurance or in pricing risk. These include the likes of Building Information Modelling (BIM) data, Building Renovation Passport (BRP) data including logbook & roadmap (e.g. retrofitting records) and Energy Performance Certificates. 

Merging the untapped data from the C-RBP with existing data, has the potential to give insurers a more well-rounded, accurate and timely view of risk, leading to improved risk pricing. They can, in turn, incentivise net-zero behaviours from their customers by rewarding climate change mitigation efforts like retrofitting. What’s more, building owners can use the C-RBP to gain access to open exposure data and, in turn, better understand their assets’ climate risks and greenhouse gas emissions. 

Finally, the C-RBP also has far reaching benefits when it comes to regulation and standard setting. Using a C-RBP could aid regulators in examining a company’s environmental impact by creating a more structured and efficient disclosure process with standardised data up-front. Companies can use the passport in their ESG disclosures for example, in order to demonstrate that it has accurately incorporated climate risks into its business strategy. 

Future of the industry 

Data could provide key solutions for the insurance industry, especially in the face of challenges it has encountered since our SERI project in 2021. In June this year, the Net-Zero Insurance Alliance (NZIA) – created to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the industry – saw seven of its members leave. This was amidst growing political opposition from a group of Republicans in the United States who claimed the group might be violating antitrust laws by working together. 

The potential benefits of our Climate-Ready Building Passport (C-RBP) could serve as a beacon in these dark times, illustrating how the strategic use of data can significantly advance our mission toward net-zero objectives. By equipping insurers with a comprehensive understanding of risk, the passport becomes a valuable tool for integrating climate change mitigation efforts within the industry. Having said this, these efforts alone may not be enough. Combining government subsidies, green financing, insurance rebates, and retrofitting roadmaps with net-zero building insurance strengthens the case.

The Stream partners are working towards two key milestones in the period from September 2023 to April 2024; delivering a minimum viable product (MVP) for initial open data releases in December 2023 and a functional platform in April 2024.

Stream’s Advisory Groups provide vital guidance and feedback to Stream’s workstreams as the programme moves forward in the Implementation Phase. These groups include subject matter experts from water companies and other industry stakeholders.

Here is a summary of what was discussed during the September meetings:

Market & User Needs Advisory Group

• We heard a presentation on the definition of a Use Case, with the example of EV on-street charge points from Open Energy
• The group were shown and asked to comment on the provisional research plan for Use Cases for Day 1 launch; the aim is to have 2-3 use cases ready for prioritisation by the AG in the October meeting
• Discussion on how this use-case research focuses on unlocking value for end users and will push innovation within Stream. A point was raised that we should be looking at freedom of information requests to determine the data that consumers already request. If this data was available it would open up data already requested while making it easier for water companies to answer requests.
• The MVP feasibility study was presented by the workstream lead, next steps laid out and feedback requested.
• Two water-company datasets were approved for publishing as part of the MVP, two more it was agreed to continue investigating, with more guidance for water companies on how to deliver these datasets.
• Water companies approval processes and timescales were discussed and how these compare between companies; also discussed was the work planned on data standardisation.

This group will meet again in October 2023.

Technical Requirements & Operating Model

• We heard an update on the timeline of the MVP (interim data publishing platform and initial Open Data published) and Day 1 solution (full live platform launch), and the procurement process for the Day 1 solution.
• The MVP workstream team presented their MVP feasibility study.
• The planned development of a temporary data storage solution for MVP was discussed, with enquiries on whether an off the shelf solution could be used.
• The cyber security of the MVP platform was raised, with water companies requesting that they see a formal plan to enable legal sign-off within their organisations to publish data via the platform.
• We heard a brief overview of Open Energy
• Following a summary of next steps for MVP, the MVP workstream sought guidance from water companies following the meeting on
  • Expected turnaround time from Water Companies regarding data requests for the platform/use cases
  • Anonymised data styles expected
  • Where to host MVP platform

This group will meet again in November, with an interim working group planned for October 2023.

Ross: Hi Chris, in order to lay the foundations for our chat, can you define what we mean by a data catalogue? 

Chris: A data catalogue can be an individual organisation making the datasets that it wants to publish available through a portal or website. It can also be an index of other organisations’ data sets. Our Open Net Zero service, for example, is a data catalogue that indexes many other data catalogues. We don’t copy or store any of the data they hold, we just provide a service to help find their datasets, wherever they are on the web.

Ross: What is the importance of tagging in data catalogues?

Chris: Tagging is a mechanism for organising or labelling your datasets. You want people to find the datasets and understand them when they get there. Tagging should reflect your best idea of what will help people focus in on the data they’re looking for, but within this is the challenge of trying to work out what people think when they are looking for information. One person’s organisational structure can be quite different from the next.

Ross: What is Icebreaker One’s approach to tagging in Open Net Zero? 

Chris: We take a use-case-driven approach to tagging. This means taking a real situation of data requirement and working out what the person looking for data needs and consequently how we should structure the data so that it’s useful to them. This leads to a much more purpose-led approach to labelling data. And, over time, we hope to have enough use cases that we end up with a general set, formed around use cases rather than in a vacuum. An example we’re working on at the moment, is a use case focused around finding datasets that can influence impact investing in the built environment. We believe this kind of use case will also help other types of searches in the future.

Adding to this, with Open Net Zero, we’re trying to make data discoverable from a very large number of sources. We store the tags that the originators use because we want to perpetuate that information onto other people that get data from us. But at the same time, we add our own tags in an attempt to map them into categories that are useful. Specifically around the way the data is categorised and how it might be applied in getting to net zero, since that’s what we’re all about.

Eventually, we aim to build a subset of common tags from all of the data we’re seeing so we can start to encourage some standards. Icebreaker One doesn’t intend to become a standards body, but we can see patterns and we want people to join us in contributing to the conversation around the tags net-zero datasets should be labelled with.

Ross: You mentioned standards, what pre-existing standards are there in regards to datasets?

Chris: There are many standards that you can adhere to when you’re talking about properties of data. For example, there are standards for how to represent the file format. There’s also something called ‘controlled vocabularies’. So, within the field of ‘unit of measure’ there’s a control vocabulary of how you can say what the unit of measure is – kilograms, cubic inches etc. 

Overall, I think the main problem around adopting a standard is that organisations, whether in the US, EU or elsewhere, will design a vocabulary with one particular purpose but this can become problematic when trying to generalise beyond this one purpose. 

Ross: What are some of the main problems you’re finding when working with data catalogues for Open Net Zero? 

Chris: Machine-readability: Some data catalogues lack a machine-readable interface, which makes our work with Open Net Zero, as a catalogue of catalogues, much harder. We can add 20,000 datasets from a machine-readable catalogue to our index in five minutes but this isn’t always the reality. In many cases, we find that the data publishers have concentrated on web portals where people manually navigate to find and download a data file but there’s no way to navigate using software.  

Custom APIs: We have a backlog of several catalogues that can only be accessed through a custom API (application programming interface). They have an API to list the datasets and retrieve information about them, which is better than nothing, but it means that each API needs to be taken separately and we have to work out how they organised it, how they map to our data structure and so on. What this means is, an organisation has done all the work to create an API, and then everybody who uses it has to do that work to use the API. There are established standards for publishing catalogues, such as DCAT, CSW and INSPIRE that make including the data in other tools much easier.

Licensing: Licensing can be inconsistent, and a question data users have to ask is: Does the dataset’s licence permit me to use it for my intended purpose? Many data portals have no information about what you can do with the data they publish. Some assume it’s implicitly open because they’ve published it on the web, but without a licence you can’t know that for sure. It could be covered by copyright, which means that you’re not allowed to use it.

Recourse: It’s good practice to make sure that you as a publisher are contactable. We have forms on Open Net Zero to ask whether a data set exists for a particular thing, in which case we’ll try and help if we can, and to suggest a data set that we’ve missed, either one that you’ve published or one that you’ve seen that you think should be in our list. It’s really important that you don’t just publish without recourse because you won’t learn whether your data is useful or not. A lot of organisations put a lot of effort into creating, collating, describing and publishing datasets as well as all the legal stuff but then aren’t contactable. 

Ross: What countries or organisations are publishing catalogues well/poorly?

Chris: At a national data level, we’ve found France and Ireland very easy to index. They’ve got a sensible categorization and tagging scheme. As a net zero index, we don’t want every bit of data those governments publish about every part of their operations. By having a good categorisation system we are able to index only relevant datasets. 

For a recent bad example, I would point to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). They have published a widely-used official database of emission factors, yet the full dataset cannot be downloaded, there’s no catalogue of what’s in there and there’s no API. It’s just a website you have to fish through and download CSV files, or you can download a desktop app that does the same thing.

As a middle ground between these examples, you’ve got data catalogues like the RTE (France) API. It’s a good interactive data portal with 40 or 50 APIs and data sets but again it lacks machine readability. The only way you can see the list is by going to the website and navigating through them. So we haven’t indexed their data, not because it isn’t good data but because 50 APIs is too much to index and maintain manually.

The value of good data publication

Open Net Zero and the Icebreaker One team ultimately want to raise the bar when it comes to sharing net-zero data. Part of this is highlighting what good data publication looks like. If organisations are providing good licensing, clear access conditions and well-structured descriptive metadata, this should be praised. It also means having conversations with those looking to improve, like our work to make net-zero data more discoverable for impact investors. An Icebreaker One membership allows organisations to be part of this conversation and part of a collaborative process of shaping net zero data. 

Perseus is developing whole-of-market solutions to create rapidly scalable, low-effort, low-friction sustainability reporting for SMEs. The ultimate objective is to arrive at a standardised approach that is fit for purpose for, and can be rapidly deployed across the market. The Perseus Advisory Groups will inform the development of an environmental, social, and governance (ESG) data ecosystem which accelerates the transition to net zero.

Key insights from the User Needs & Impact Advisory Group

• Focussing on developing the infrastructure and a demonstrator will show the value and impact of Perseus to key stakeholders
• We discussed the importance of scope and focus – doing one thing well (automating electricity data) allows for that value to be demonstrated
• It is vital to be separating what we should focus on for the demonstrator, and what can be placed on a roadmap
• Key to understand what is useful and impactful for each stakeholder – such as linking kilowatt hour and spend data – as that is the language SMEs speak
• Challenges related to data access, format, and engagement were discussed, including the need for transparency and trustworthy certifications

Key insights from the Communications Advisory Group

• We agreed on the scope and core communication goals, and identified key stakeholders we need to be properly engaging
• It is important to have a low barrier to entry to engage with SMEs
• The value messaging needs to reflect what is relevant to them, with tangible benefits specific to what is in it for them to participate

The Advisory Groups play a critical role in Perseus’ development. There is more information on the other Advisory Groups and their meeting dates here. If you want to get in touch with us, email us at perseus@ib1.org.  

After carefully considering the blockers and opportunities, greenhouse gas impact, financial needs and stakeholders involved, we arrived at a use case centred around the built environment, a sector responsible for around 40% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

Use case 1: Increased transparency and comparability of the environmental data in ESG disclosures is needed in supply chains to better enable impact investment decisions in the commercial built environment.

First impressions

While the chosen use case received widespread support from the Advisory Group members, its broad and wide reaching nature indicated the need for further exploration. Indeed, being specific about the data, stakeholders, investment type and underlying standards and regulatory requirements would help us identify what was needed to unlock the use case while also preventing mission creep.

Decision makers & Investment types

Identifying the key decision makers in our selected use case would enable a more targeted approach, with insurers, banks and investors all emerging as crucial players capable of driving real impact in this space.

For example, if there was widespread recognition in the insurance industry that more sustainable buildings present a lower risk, this could subsequently reduce insurance payouts, and be reflected in reduced rates. Banks, on the other hand, have the ability to offer preferential financing or incentives for building projects that prioritise sustainability.

However, in order to identify a key decision maker, we felt it important to first narrow down the type of investment we want to focus on. This came in the form of three viable investment types: debt instruments, project financing and lending. Green bonds, for example, are a debt instrument that offer a targeted way to raise funds specifically for projects or initiatives that have environmental benefits.

Benchmarking & Regulation

One member of our AG highlighted the prominence of our chosen use case on the EU’s agenda and its high demand at conferences. Unpacking this, we can see the importance of frameworks like the EU Taxonomy Regulation and its focus on helping investors allocate capital toward sustainable activities. Growing pressure from the EU Taxonomy means that investments that are more aligned with net-zero will be favoured by banks and investors. In the context of the built environment, banks may offer favourable financing terms or incentives for projects that align with the EU Taxonomy’s criteria.

Elsewhere, organisations like GRESB (Global Real Estate Sustainability Benchmark) enable investors and real estate companies to measure, benchmark and improve their ESG performance over time. And, although participation in GRESB is voluntary, there is a belief that a wider adoption of these benchmarking tools will encourage more consistent reporting in the future.

Further thoughts and considerations

• Accessing accurate energy and water data from building occupants is an ongoing challenge
• We have to ensure the data involved in the use case is accessible, compatible and machine readable
• In cases where the building is leased, the energy usage data may be dispersed among multiple tenants, making it difficult to gather a complete picture
• Important to identify one piece of data that’s integral for investment decision-making
• Questions were raised about the roles and organisations involved, the gathering and validation of data, risk assessment, and monitoring impact expectations throughout the investment’s lifetime

Looking ahead, our chosen use case helps us to determine the initial requirements for an online Icebreaker One demonstrator that can improve the data sharing and infrastructure of company impact data. It also provides scope for future iterations of the use case, potentially helping to solve cross-industry problems.

Our next advisory group meeting takes place on July 27th at 10-11:30am (BST), if you’re part of the ESG ecosystem or have experience in the built environment sector we would value your input and participation. Learn more and sign up here.

Why automate SME emissions reporting?

Elisa Moscolin, EVP Sustainability & Foundation at Sage highlighted the importance of simplifying reporting processes for SMEs, enabling them to actively participate in the transition to a low-carbon economy: “SMEs want to get engaged, they want to get on board, but they find it incredibly difficult. They find the regulatory framework and reporting requirements impossible to navigate.”  As to the potential impact on emissions reduction, Elisa explained that ‘44% of greenhouse gas emissions, non household GHG emissions. The bottom line is, we will not achieve Net Zero without them.’

Now is the time to act – join Perseus

A motto we repeat often is ‘to go far, we must go together’. Nowhere is that more apparent than in a complex multi-stakeholder project like Perseus. With the founding team in place, we are looking to expand our coalition to build a truly whole-of-market solution addressing the needs and interests of all stakeholders.

Remaining on the sidelines increasingly represents a reputational and strategic risk for any business with Net Zero ambitions. With DESNZ on the steering group, ministerial support from the ministers for Energy Security and Net Zero, and the project leads feeding into the new Net Zero Council and Smart Data Council, we are confident that the project’s outputs will influence future policy and regulation. By joining Perseus, organisations can contribute to shaping this future.

During the launch event, Alex Sobel, MP and shadow minister for Nature Recovery and the Domestic Environment, emphasised the need for stakeholders to come together and support Project Perseus. He urged organisations not yet involved to seize the opportunity, stating, “If you’re not an early adopter, you’ll get left behind, and this wave is coming.” 

Louis Taylor, CEO of the British Business Bank, echoed this, stating “You just have to think about the opportunity to be involved in shaping the future.”

Conclusion:

As we reflect on the success of the launch event and the shared vision of industry leaders, it is evident that Project Perseus is positioned to become a key piece of national infrastructure underpinning the Net Zero transition. By simplifying reporting for SMEs and fostering collaboration among stakeholders, we are paving the way for a sustainable future. Stay tuned for further updates and join us as we empower SMEs to embark on their net-zero journey. Together, we can make a significant impact and build a resilient, low-carbon economy.

To join the programme, sign up here or contact perseus@ib1.org for more information.

Icebreaker One is delighted once again to be partnering with Stream, which has been named as one of the winners of the third Water Breakthrough Challenge for the Implementation Phase of the programme, receiving £3.9m to unlock the potential of water data to benefit customers, society, and the environment. 

Stream consists of a consortium of 16 water and professional services companies with Northumbrian Water as the lead organisation. It will put in place technology and processes to remove the barriers to opening up and sharing water company data. As governance advisory partner, Icebreaker One will be running advisory groups to convene stakeholders to collaborate on this programme. Stream’s vision is to co-create a Data Sharing and Open Data Framework to unlock water data for the benefit of customers, society, and the environment. Icebreaker One is now inviting expressions of interest for the below Advisory Groups which will take place during the remainder of 2023.

Advisory Groups

The purpose of the advisory groups is to provide expert input into the programme, to address commercial, non-commercial and public needs. It will deliver cross-industry alignment on the approach, including clear use cases, a roadmap of work, definitions of risk, gaps and opportunities, and it will provide recommended approaches and resolutions. 

The Advisory Groups are as follows:

Advisory Group 1: Market and user needs

Purpose:

This group is to explore, prioritise and work through use cases that should be supported by Stream. This includes identifying defined users, their needs, mapping the data value chain and the broader ecosystem surrounding each use case.

The skills and expertise from participants will include:

• Identifying and defining user, market and societal needs
• Understanding market/ecosystem requirements and functional capabilities
• Articulating the consumer, market, societal and economic/financial benefits
• Understanding and quantifying the impact to business
• Understanding of the impact of Stream on UK policy

Advisory Group 2: Technical requirements and operating model

Purpose: 

This group is to understand technical challenges and opportunities in accessing water data, including:

• Understanding the expected types of datasets and data transactions required for the selected use case(s)
• Compliance including from a data protection, competition law and EIRs perspective
• Understanding market needs for user authentication
• Data-best-practices, security, privacy-by-design
• Licensing
• A technical feasibility assessment of existing solutions and their suitability
• review of existing governance, legislation, contracts, legacy technology and existing processes and systems
• Understanding the Critical National Infrastructure (CNI) risks and impacts

The skills and expertise from participants will include:

• Identifying and defining types of datasets and data transactions required for the selected use cases
• Technical understanding of compliance, including from a data protection, competition law, State Aid and EIRs perspective
• Understanding of the Critical National Infrastructure (CNI) risks and impacts
• Understanding of the market needs for user authentication
• Understanding of data-best-practices, security, privacy-by-design
• Understanding of licensing

Advisory Group members will be asked to commit up to 6 hours per month. This includes attending the 2 hour Advisory Group meetings.

Members included data analysts, specialised data providers, framework developers, assurers, impact investors, research & academia and more. The goal of the advisory group was to produce a long list of use cases centred around the following problem statement:

How to improve the data sharing and infrastructure of company impact data (scopes 1-3), starting with water and energy use, to increase trust and data validation, including by ratings agencies. 

Water and Energy 

With our problem statement focusing on water and energy use, it was important to be aware that this is an area of disclosure that lags far behind disclosures on GHG emissions. What’s more, finding the clear link between water data in the real economy and linking it back to the financial economy represents a significant challenge. One member of the AG suggested this link could be found by focusing on water pressure, which acts as one key indicator of how water can be linked back to company performance. 

Discovering the real financial incentive for organisations to voluntarily disclose this data remains firmly at the centre of the issue. And, while some regulatory requirements exist for reporting water data, such as the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) or initiatives such as the CDP Water Program, it seems finding the carrot rather than the stick would yield a more satisfying solution. Disclosing this data ultimately comes down to an organisation choosing to be more transparent, demonstrating their commitment to more sustainable practices and therefore building trust with stakeholders and customers. 

Scope 3 emissions

As the meeting progressed, the advisory group quickly began to refine its focus, looking to Scope 3 emissions. This is a challenging area, not least because Scope 3 emission disclosures are voluntary and yet are said to account for around 90% of the average company’s emissions, according to the GHG protocol. 

Dissecting further, Scope 3 emissions can be separated into upstream and downstream sources, with one AG member noting that upstream sources (emissions stemming from the production of a business’s products or services) may hold more leverage whereas downstream sources (emissions stemming from the use and disposal of these) are more sensitive and fragmented. 

More specifically, the methods of acquiring data from downstream sources can be done by looking at spend data, supplier surveys and product life-cycle assessment data, though each method has its own respective drawbacks. ‘Banks for example, use spend based analysis to work out energy use of customers which isn’t a great method as it has a 10% error rate’, noted one member of the AG. 

Voluntary disclosures

While the voluntary nature of Scope 3 disclosures is set to change, following an announcement from the ISSB in December 2022, those companies already voluntarily disclosing their Scope 3 emissions often appear to have a bigger impact on the planet than those that don’t report on their Scope 3. This, of course, is not an accurate representation of what is really happening. 

Therefore, alongside a push to improve the transparency and accuracy of ESG disclosures there also needs to be a shift in attitude or reframing of how we view companies Scope 3 emissions. Organisations should be incentivised to disclose their Scope 3 emissions and those that demonstrate transparent and accurate environmental reporting should be rewarded when they do so.

This line of thinking from the Advisory Group led to the inception of one potential use case on how to: increase the voluntary sharing of data – celebrating people who are doing it well by creating strong impact benefits, and making it interoperable to share with stakeholders and competitors. 

Disclosure formats

One way of increasing the transparency and accuracy of disclosures is by moving away from reports in PDF format, adopting alternatives such as CSV or XBRL (eXtensible Business Reporting Language) with countries like Switzerland now pushing for the use of the latter. 

Unlike PDF, which isn’t machine readable, making it difficult to compare companies at scale, XBRL is used to deliver human-readable financial statements in a machine-readable, structured data format, allowing for the comparative analysis that formats like PDF do not. 

However, despite XBRL having the potential to report certain financial aspects of ESG, ESG disclosures also cover a range of non-financial topics. And, considering the continually evolving nature of ESG reporting, XBRL simply doesn’t go far enough to capture the broad nature of ESG disclosures.

Looking ahead 

We now look ahead to our next Impact Investing advisory group meeting on June 27. It’s here that we will prioritise two use cases, focusing on how to improve the data sharing and infrastructure of company impact data (scopes 1 – 3), to increase trust and data validation, thus enabling better impact investment decisions. 

Read the full report here