Відео

There is no sound after 5 minutes....

Is there already an updated version of the VSME Excel sheet published? - I cant find it on the EFRAG VSME page. Ideally I would like to have the german version, but its still the old version (Basic, PAT, BP) online. If you could provide information on that, that would be very helpful. Kind regards, and thank you!

Really interesting. Thank you.

Thank you so much for this so effective and concise review. This simplicity enables actions taking.

Excelente!

Excelente!

@gtp.esg

Excelente!

Unfortunately Brussels bureaucrats learned nothing from Brexit and continue to publish nonsense 1000 pages regualtions full of acronyms, jargon, closed language. 🤦🏻‍♂️

Ratke Summit

Lewis Scott Moore Kimberly Williams Robert

Is this the person who should inform firms, investors and consumers about climate change's regulation...?

hi EFRAG, the link to the presentation no longer works. Can you please check and upload the correct link?

Thank you, EFRAG Team, for sharing such valuable insights. Can we find the link for the materials used?

In Case Climate Change i.e. ESRS E1 is not material as per the double materiality assessment still do they require to disclose minimum requirement for policies and targets?

Hi, I'm preparing a draft to work on the ESRS G1 and I am asking myself what "ES" stands for in the DR 6 under Metrics and Targets?

🤝🏻

Global warming was officially stated at 1.1°C in 1991 and 1.06°C in 2022. There is no mechanism that would allow greenhouse gas behavior to cause global warming. The back of the United Nation's IPCC science report states it took its greenhouse gas samples at 20,000 meters altitude where it is common high school level knowledge there is no greenhouse radiant energy. This is typical practice for deceptive marketing to state legal data transparency protecting the perpetrators from fraud prosecution. Earth's greenhouse effect is frequently used as a primary example to high school students of a system always in saturation from the strong greenhouse gas water vapor absorbing all the greenhouse radiant energy from the earth with greenhouse gases within 20 meters of the surface that is all around us everyday and can't have its overall effect changed. There is no further greenhouse radiant energy to interact with greenhouse gases. At 1% average tropospheric water vapor over 99% of earth’s greenhouse effect is from water vapor. Water vapor would hold earth's greenhouse effect in saturation if it were the only greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. Arctic warming is taking place with the proving mechanism being warm Atlantic Ocean waters migrating deeper and more frequently into the Arctic Ocean warming it and the region. That warmer water is causing a few weeks less of reflective snow and ice coverage resulting in more solar heat gain to the Arctic region surface. Atmospheric CO2 levels of 1200 ppm about three times what they are today would greatly invigorate C3 plants the majority of plant life on earth greatly greening the planet. 0.4% of the atmosphere is CO2 and on average 1% is H20 water vapor. (1% H20)/(0.4% CO2) = 25. Water vapor is 25 times more present in the atmosphere on average than CO2. Water vapor has an CO2e of 18, 18 X 25 = 450 CO2e total for water vapor to 1 CO2e for CO2. The Earth’s oceans have 3-1/2 million sea floor volcanic vents warming the water and changing it’s chemistry that have not been systematically accounted for.

Global warming was officially stated at 1.1°C in 1991 and 1.06°C in 2022. There is no mechanism that would allow greenhouse gas behavior to cause global warming. The back of the United Nation's IPCC science report states it took its greenhouse gas samples at 20,000 meters altitude where it is common high school level knowledge there is no greenhouse radiant energy. This is typical practice for deceptive marketing to state legal data transparency protecting the perpetrators from fraud prosecution. Earth's greenhouse effect is frequently used as a primary example to high school students of a system always in saturation from the strong greenhouse gas water vapor absorbing all the greenhouse radiant energy from the earth with greenhouse gases within 20 meters of the surface that is all around us everyday and can't have its overall effect changed. There is no further greenhouse radiant energy to interact with greenhouse gases. At 1% average tropospheric water vapor over 99% of earth’s greenhouse effect is from water vapor. Water vapor would hold earth's greenhouse effect in saturation if it were the only greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. Arctic warming is taking place with the proving mechanism being warm Atlantic Ocean waters migrating deeper and more frequently into the Arctic Ocean warming it and the region. That warmer water is causing a few weeks less of reflective snow and ice coverage resulting in more solar heat gain to the Arctic region surface. Atmospheric CO2 levels of 1200 ppm about three times what they are today would greatly invigorate C3 plants the majority of plant life on earth greatly greening the planet. 0.4% of the atmosphere is CO2 and on average 1% is H20 water vapor. (1% H20)/(0.4% CO2) = 25. Water vapor is 25 times more present in the atmosphere on average than CO2. Water vapor has an CO2e of 18, 18 X 25 = 450 CO2e total for water vapor to 1 CO2e for CO2. The Earth’s oceans have 3-1/2 million sea floor volcanic vents warming the water and changing it’s chemistry that have not been systematically accounted for.

Global warming was officially stated at 1.1°C in 1991 and 1.06°C in 2022. There is no mechanism that would allow greenhouse gas behavior to cause global warming. The back of the United Nation's IPCC science report states it took its greenhouse gas samples at 20,000 meters altitude where it is common high school level knowledge there is no greenhouse radiant energy. This is typical practice for deceptive marketing to state legal data transparency protecting the perpetrators from fraud prosecution. Earth's greenhouse effect is frequently used as a primary example to high school students of a system always in saturation from the strong greenhouse gas water vapor absorbing all the greenhouse radiant energy from the earth with greenhouse gases within 20 meters of the surface that is all around us everyday and can't have its overall effect changed. There is no further greenhouse radiant energy to interact with greenhouse gases. At 1% average tropospheric water vapor over 99% of earth’s greenhouse effect is from water vapor. Water vapor would hold earth's greenhouse effect in saturation if it were the only greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. Arctic warming is taking place with the proving mechanism being warm Atlantic Ocean waters migrating deeper and more frequently into the Arctic Ocean warming it and the region. That warmer water is causing a few weeks less of reflective snow and ice coverage resulting in more solar heat gain to the Arctic region surface. Atmospheric CO2 levels of 1200 ppm about three times what they are today would greatly invigorate C3 plants the majority of plant life on earth greatly greening the planet. 0.4% of the atmosphere is CO2 and on average 1% is H20 water vapor. (1% H20)/(0.4% CO2) = 25. Water vapor is 25 times more present in the atmosphere on average than CO2. Water vapor has an CO2e of 18, 18 X 25 = 450 CO2e total for water vapor to 1 CO2e for CO2. The Earth’s oceans have 3-1/2 million sea floor volcanic vents warming the water and changing it’s chemistry that have not been systematically accounted for.

I appreciate the interoperability guide, but this is becoming way too complicated. If you want companies to report, stop making it so difficult and burdensome for companies to understand and comply.

Very confusing standards, EFRAG should do a better job. How are you expecting companies to understand those illogical rules and regulations?

You have to hire experts from EFRAG to understands this standards. How are company suppose to understand this?

Sustashift (in co-operation with the Finnish government) has just developed a software that has model documents directly from the ESRS taxonomy and which tags the information automatically and instantly. No need for manual tagging. So all companies in scope of CSRD can use this to prepare the content of the report to ready-made model documents and the software tags the report instantly. And it is cheaper than the software for manual tagging.

Hello, is the deck used during this webinar available for download somewhere as well?

Hi, these infos are really vague for me. I cannot really understand what she means. if you have a resource that i should start with, please let me know in the comments. Thanks. Or any relevant courses etc.

Great input. Thanks for detailed explanations

Yes, She only reads thé slides, Not very useful. Thé slides Can bé found on thé efrag website.

🙃 Promo>SM

Dude, a présentation IS Not tot read Off thé slides. What s thé point?

This presentation is soooo baddd. It's a shame that EU finances this.

Sooo bad! why read instead of explaining?

Oh, it s so hard to follow a read presentation. So unprofessional!

sorry, but how should a normal person understand anything of this? This explains nothing and is overall confusing.

Thank you very much for providing these helpful explanations! 👏Are there any plans for updated videos following the final revised version of ESRS?

The most confusing and poorly drafted standards EVER.

The slides of ESRS E3 prove blurred and not readable.

Buenos Diaz!

where did EFRAG publish the decision tree explained at 7:00?

this is so harrrrrd to understand. Just keep at it and one day you'll get it...

Hi EFRAG, the video implies that matierality decisions can and shouls be made at the TOPIC level. However, Annex B and Section 3.2 of ESRS 1 strongly imply that, in fact, these decisions should be made at the "sustainability matters" (down to sub-sub topic) level. The problem I see here is that the disclosures themselves are not structured or ordered by "matter" which means that disclosures themselves might be half-required depending on which sub-sub-topic has been determiend to be material or not. Is anyone able to provide guidance here, I can see this being a difference that has many tens and possibly hundreds of hours of work implication for reporting entities.

👍

👍

👍

Excellent materials, thanks for sharing it

Was the presenter in a hurry somewhere? Presentation at such a pace that the presenter made mistakes. Can't the material be presented in a calmer way? As is the case with other people who presented their respective areas?

When conducting the materiality assessment on a sustainability topic is it enough that the assessment fulfills the requirements set out in ESRS 1 or must the assessment be conducted according to the relevant IRO-1. Example: when considering the topic “water withdrawal” does the materiality assessment have to be conducted according to ESRS 2 - IRO 1 - E3 AR. 1-15?

Dear Mr. Vitols, thank you very much for your presenatation, however I have currently a bit confusion, therefore could you please enlighten me why the disclosure requirement number or order on this presentation is different than it's mentioned in the ESRS draft S1-1? e.g. on the Draft the DS S1-9 is Training and Skill Development but here in this presentation the DS S1-9 is Diversity indicators (minutes 09:17--)

Thank you, for this educational session! It would be interesting to find interconnection between reporting standards and world well known management standards e.g. ISO

i love eggfrag