As original instigator & member of SBTI Technical Advisory Group since the get-go, this isn’t actually accurate. SBTI made methodology decisions on their own, without “approval” by the TAG. In fact, SBTI consistently disregarded substantive input by the TAG.
https://twitter.com/jannikgiesekam/status/1357354529893793793
It’s already part of the public record that SBTI’s Sectoral Decarbonization Approach is structurally impeded from aligning with the 1.5C target — a fact that was solidified by the @IEA opting against disclosing data on its NZE2050 (1.5C) scenario late last year. 
There’s another scientific study coming out in a peer-reviewed journal in the near future that will shed more light on this conundrum...
And there’s another scientific study in the works that looks at SBTi’s target validation process (another area where the TAG gave input)…
Stay tuned to this space for updates on these fronts.
Stay tuned to this space for updates on these fronts.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
