The real risk in your REC procurement isn't the price. It's the timing.
If you've been buying renewable energy certificates for a few years, you already know the annual cycle. Request budget, purchase RECs, retire them against that year's emissions, start over. It works, until it doesn't.
The friction usually shows up quietly. It's what happens when a long-term problem gets solved one year at a time.
The annual approach is quietly costing you:
Your claims are getting weaker. SBTi, CDP, and RE100 are placing more weight on the quality and vintage of what you buy. What counted as credible last year may not meet the bar for coming years.
You start over every cycle. You build the case from scratch, compete for budget against other priorities, and re-explain why this matters. One difficult budget year and your Scope 2 strategy has a gap in it, and that gap shows up in your disclosures.
You have no pricing protection. Buy year by year and you pay whatever the market offers that cycle, with no visibility past the current year.
High-Impact RECs solve this differently. When you sign a forward contract, you're not buying from projects already on the grid. You're providing the contracted revenue that makes a renewable energy project financeable.That's a fundamentally different approach and timeline than spot purchasing, and it's why the sizing and approval decisions matter more than most sustainability teams realize.
What the guide covers
A four-step model to sizing your commitment:
Plus what each of the three outcomes looks like in practice, under-procurement, well-calibrated, and over-procurement, so you know what you're managing toward before you sign anything.
Defending the strategy up the decision chain:

