Singapore Sustainable Finance Association https://validator.w3.org/feed/docs/rss2.html Home Membership Industry Event (251030) – Sustainable Asia Conference 2025 – Financing the Transition: How the Financial Ecosystem Can Mobilise Capital for Asia’s Net-Zero Future Industry Event (251017) – CMI Forum 2025 Industry Event (251023) – GRESB Regional Insights Industry Event (251028) – One Univers Executive Luncheon Industry Event (251022) – RI Asia 2025 Industry Event (251031) – APLMA-ASFI-SSFA Financing Transition through Taxonomy Implementation Webinar SSFA Event (250821) – SSFA-Google-Symbiosis Coalition Roundtable on Advancing Nature-based Carbon Removals in SEA SSFA Event (251112) COP30 Finance Day Panel – Supporting credible corporate transition through Carbon Markets SSFA Event (251113) COP30 Finance Day Panel – Unlocking Sustainable Futures for MSMEs: Bridging the Sustainability Gap through Inclusive Finance and Fintech Innovation Singapore-Asia Taxonomy FAQ Repository Industry Event (250918) – Impact Asia Summit 2025 Industry Event (251008) – 17th GCNS Summit 2025 SSFA Event (251015) – SSFA-FC4S Dialogue: Catalysing NDCs Through Transition Finance Industry Event (251104) – Catalysts of Change – Spectrum of Capital SSFA Event (251015) – Australian High Commission-SSFA Roundtable on Sustainable Finance SSFA Workshop (251017) – MAS-SSFA Technical Workshop on Climate Scenario Analysis (CSA) SSFA Workshop (250821) – SSFA-OW NCB Masterclass #2 – Understanding Nature-related Risks & Financing a Nature-positive Future Under Activity 2.6 Sea and coastal water transport, it mentions “vessels achieve the levels of ambition set by the 2023 IMO Strategy…” under the Amber Criteria. What are the acceptable thresholds for said “energy efficiency improvements”? What are some of the IMO documentation/submissions/annual audit requirements that we can rely on to ascertain that the borrower meets all the criteria (e.g. EEOI/AER and their calculation methodologies)? How does the borrower attest/evidence that the vessel would be using such biofuels? It is mentioned that if vessels are using biofuels, the biofuels must “be recognised by the IMO as relevant and eligible fuels/energy carriers……taking into account the IMO LCA Guidelines”, can we curate the list of such eligible fuels in the Handbook for easier reference? Under Activity 2.6 Sea and coastal water transport, for the financing of newbuilds ships under amber, how can we make an assessment if it meets the transition criteria given actual fuel use is needed to assess alignment with the IMO revised trajectory? Governance FAQ Repository What We Do A Year After the Memorandum of Collaboration: ASEAN Common Carbon Framework Reflects on Achievements and Next Steps at COP30 SSFA Event (251114) – COP30 – One Year On: Strengthening ASEAN’s Carbon Market Integrity Through Regional Cooperation Taxonomy (TX) Workstream Natural Capital & Biodiversity (NCB) Workstream Blended Finance (BF) Workstream What are the acceptable thresholds for “GHG reduction”? Noted that IMO has a 2008 base year/ baseline and 2030 target year- since the targets are set at a global level and achievement happens in the future (e.g. 2030), how do we evidence that a particular vessel contributes/aligns with it? SSFA Connects (251007) – Member’s Showcase – ICMA & TNC SSFA Event (251006) – SSFA RMI Singapore Align Forum SSFA Event (251001) – SSFA-PwC Roundtable on SBTi FINZ Standard for Financial Institution Industry Event (250909) – S&P Global APPEC 2025 Industry Event (250923) – SEAS Sustainable Finance Committee x SSFA Joint Event SSFA Event (250918) – Convergence-UNDP Blended Finance Framework Under TSC 4.7, Manufacture of Batteries, it states that batteries must achieve “substantial GHG emission reductions”. Under TSC 4.11, it says “household appliances falling into the highest TWO classes of energy efficiency in accordance with local market standards”. But in TSC 4.12, it says “goods that meet the HIGHEST performance level for a given good in energy rating system introduced by the NEA or internationally available equivalent”. Due to the similar nature of the goods in question, should it be the highest two or just the highest? Under TSC 4.7 Manufacture of Batteries, it states that the batteries need to result in “substantial GHG emission reductions”. How does one track and evidence the way the batteries are used, the source of energy (grid or otherwise), and end-of-life/circularity in order to estimate said “substantial GHG emission reductions” (which happens in the future)? For steel, we note that the SAT criteria for amber activities align with the green criteria for production facilities operational prior to 2022 (with a sunset date of 2030). If a loan matures before 2030, should the borrower label the activity as green (aligned with CBI) or amber (aligned with SAT)? For steel, we understand that the SAT criteria are aligned with the CBI criteria. The CBI distinguishes between criteria for new and existing steel plants based on a 2022 cutoff, but the SAT does not seem to take the same approach. Could SAT provide clarification on this? For the manufacture of cement, it is noticed that the use of recycled aggregates was not taken into consideration. Why is it so? The Green Cement label under the Singapore Green Label Scheme takes this into account. For cement, why are single or combined decarbonisation measures considered eligible only for amber labelling, rather than green? Would emission intensity be a factor in the assessment? For example, if a facility integrates renewable energy measures but still has an overall emission intensity below the threshold in Table 11, would the project be eligible for green labelling? For hydrogen, when considering multiple production facilities owned by the borrower, is the emission intensity threshold applied on a facility-by-facility basis or as an average across all facilities? For basic chemicals, how is emission intensity determined for production facilities that produce a mix of various chemical products? Can this be assessed at the facility level rather than on a product-by-product basis? The eligibility criteria for battery recycling are not clearly stated. Does it mean that all the recycling types are acceptable, including pyrometallurgical recycling? Some corporates/ banks have been unsure about using the term “green” for some recycling methods. We believe adding clarifications would help avoid potential misinterpretations. According to the Amber criteria (measures), any new renewable energy installation at the facility can be classified as Amber (provided that this is implemented before 2035 and the Borrower/ Issuer has a transition plan aligned with 1.5 °C). However, if an aluminium producer takes a loan for the installation of rooftop solar panels (in order to generate solar energy for its own facility), wouldn’t this already be considered as “Green” under TSC 1.1 Electricity generation using solar PV and CSP (including electricity, heat, and cool)?