Playbook: Adopting Satellite & Remote Sensing for Climate in 90 Days — Metrics That Matter

Remote sensing services revenue reached $28.43 billion in 2024 and is projected to surge to $97.8 billion by 2032 at a 16.7% compound annual growth rate—yet fewer than 30% of sustainability teams effectively integrate satellite data into their carbon intensity and traceability reporting. For EU sustainability leads navigating CSRD compliance and carbon offset verification, understanding which metrics satellite data can credibly support has become essential. This playbook translates remote sensing capabilities into the measurement frameworks that emerging standards require.

Why It Matters

The gap between climate disclosure requirements and measurement capabilities defines the strategic challenge facing sustainability leads in 2025. The EU's Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) mandates environmental disclosures that existing corporate data systems cannot adequately support. Scope 3 emissions across complex supply chains, deforestation-free sourcing verification, and biodiversity impact assessment all require evidence beyond what procurement systems and supplier questionnaires provide.

Satellite remote sensing addresses this measurement gap at scale. Daily global coverage at resolutions sufficient for site-level monitoring enables verification of environmental claims that would otherwise require prohibitively expensive ground inspection. The carbon market's integrity crisis—driven by concerns about offset quality and additionality—has accelerated demand for independent, satellite-based Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification (MRV).

For EU organizations, the CSRD timeline creates urgency. Large public-interest entities began reporting in 2024, with requirements extending to additional companies through 2026. The European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) specify disclosure requirements that satellite data uniquely supports, including land use change, water consumption in stress areas, and biodiversity-relevant habitat monitoring.

The grid-related applications prove particularly relevant for organizations with substantial energy procurement. Satellite-based monitoring of renewable energy installations provides independent verification of additionality claims—critical as grid carbon intensity becomes a key metric for electricity-related emissions accounting.

Key Concepts

Carbon Intensity and Remote Sensing Applications

Carbon intensity metrics express emissions per unit of activity—tonnes CO2e per revenue, per product, or per energy unit. Satellite data supports carbon intensity measurement through multiple pathways: monitoring forest carbon stock changes for land-use emissions, detecting methane leaks from oil and gas operations, and verifying renewable energy generation for electricity procurement. The connection between satellite observation and carbon accounting requires careful methodology alignment.

Traceability and Supply Chain Verification

Supply chain traceability—tracking materials from origin through production to final product—increasingly requires satellite evidence for environmental claims. Deforestation-free sourcing verification depends on satellite monitoring of land conversion in source regions. The EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR) explicitly requires geolocation data and due diligence processes that satellite monitoring enables at scale.

CSRD Disclosure Requirements

The CSRD establishes disclosure requirements across environmental, social, and governance dimensions. Climate-related disclosures under ESRS E1 require Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions reporting with specified methodologies. Biodiversity disclosures under ESRS E4 require assessment of impacts on habitats and ecosystems. Pollution disclosures under ESRS E2 address air, water, and soil contamination. Each standard benefits from satellite data integration, though application specifics vary.

Offset Quality and Verification Metrics

Carbon offset quality depends on additionality (would the carbon reduction have occurred anyway?), permanence (will the carbon remain sequestered?), and absence of leakage (does the project simply shift emissions elsewhere?). Satellite monitoring provides independent verification across these dimensions, detecting forest cover changes, land-use shifts, and baseline condition comparisons that ground surveys alone cannot efficiently address.

Metric Category	Key KPIs	Satellite Data Source	Measurement Frequency	Accuracy Range
Forest Carbon	Biomass change (tCO2e/ha)	Optical + LiDAR + SAR	Annual-Quarterly	±15-30%
Methane Emissions	Point source detection (kg/hr)	Hyperspectral	Daily-Weekly	±10-25%
Land Use Change	Deforestation area (ha)	Optical + SAR	Weekly-Monthly	±5-10%
Agricultural Emissions	Crop type and yield (t/ha)	Multispectral	Weekly-Monthly	±10-20%
Grid Carbon Intensity	Renewable capacity (MW)	Optical	Monthly-Annual	±5-10%

What's Working

Methane Emissions Detection at Scale

Satellite-based methane detection has matured from research demonstration to operational deployment. GHGSat operates a dedicated constellation detecting facility-level emissions from oil and gas operations, landfills, and agricultural sources. The International Energy Agency's Methane Tracker integrates satellite data to provide country-level emissions estimates. For sustainability leads, this capability enables verification of supplier methane intensity claims and identification of high-emission sources within value chains.

Deforestation Monitoring for Supply Chain Compliance

The EU Deforestation Regulation's 2024 entry into force created immediate demand for satellite-based compliance verification. Services including Global Forest Watch, Starling (by Airbus and Earthworm), and Satelligic provide deforestation monitoring across commodity supply chains. These platforms connect satellite observations to procurement data, flagging suppliers or sourcing regions with recent land conversion. Early adopters report 40-60% reduction in compliance verification costs compared to audit-based approaches.

Renewable Energy Capacity Verification

Satellite imagery enables independent verification of renewable energy installations claimed for power purchase agreements and RECs. Planet Labs and other providers offer solar farm and wind turbine detection at resolutions sufficient to confirm capacity claims. This capability proves valuable for organizations seeking to verify additionality of renewable energy procurement against grid carbon intensity baselines.

Integrated Climate Risk Platforms

Major climate risk analytics providers including Four Twenty Seven (Moody's), Jupiter Intelligence, and Climanomics have integrated satellite-derived environmental data into physical risk assessment platforms. These integrations connect satellite observations of water stress, vegetation health, and land subsidence to asset-level risk scores. For sustainability leads managing TCFD-aligned climate risk disclosure, these platforms provide decision-relevant metrics derived from satellite data.

What's Not Working

Uncertainty Communication Gaps

Satellite-derived environmental metrics carry inherent uncertainty that technical documentation often understates. Forest biomass estimates from satellite data typically include ±15-30% uncertainty ranges—significant when translated to carbon credit valuations or emissions inventory precision. Sustainability leads face challenges communicating these uncertainties to stakeholders expecting precise metrics, creating tension between measurement reality and disclosure expectations.

Methodological Fragmentation

Despite convergence toward satellite-based verification, specific methodologies vary across standards, registries, and jurisdictions. CSRD disclosure under ESRS, voluntary carbon market verification under Verra or Gold Standard, and EUDR compliance each impose distinct methodological requirements. Organizations pursuing multiple compliance objectives face fragmented data requirements that no single satellite data product addresses comprehensively.

Attribution and Causality Challenges

Satellite data reveals what happened but not necessarily why. Detecting deforestation is straightforward; attributing it to specific supply chain actors requires integration with ground-truth data, transaction records, and contextual analysis. Similarly, methane detection identifies emission sources but requires additional investigation to determine responsible parties and root causes.

Cost-Quality Tradeoffs

High-resolution, high-frequency satellite data sufficient for rigorous verification remains expensive for comprehensive deployment. Organizations face tradeoffs between coverage (monitoring all suppliers versus a sample), frequency (continuous versus periodic assessment), and resolution (site-level versus regional detection). Budget constraints often force compromises that limit the rigor of satellite-based verification programs.

Skill and Capacity Gaps

Effective satellite data integration requires expertise spanning remote sensing, environmental science, and business applications. Most sustainability teams lack this expertise internally, creating dependence on vendors or consultants who may not fully understand organizational context. Building internal capacity requires investment that competes with other sustainability priorities.

Key Players

Established Leaders

Descartes Labs provides satellite analytics infrastructure enabling enterprises to integrate Earth observation into business applications, with particular strength in agricultural and supply chain monitoring.

Airbus Defence and Space operates the Starling deforestation monitoring platform in partnership with Earthworm Foundation, specifically designed for EUDR compliance and sustainable sourcing verification.

Google Earth Engine provides free access to petabytes of satellite imagery with cloud computing infrastructure, enabling sustainability teams to develop custom analyses without significant upfront investment.

Maxar Technologies delivers highest-resolution commercial satellite imagery supporting detailed site-level verification where precision matters most.

Emerging Startups

GHGSat leads satellite-based methane emissions monitoring, providing facility-level detection capabilities increasingly required for oil and gas sector Scope 1 and Scope 3 emissions verification.

Pachama applies machine learning to satellite data specifically for forest carbon credit verification, representing purpose-built solutions for carbon offset quality assessment.

Orbio Earth develops automated satellite analytics for corporate sustainability applications, focusing on accessibility for sustainability teams without remote sensing expertise.

Regrow Ag combines satellite data with agronomic models for agricultural supply chain emissions measurement, addressing the complex Scope 3 category of purchased agricultural commodities.

Key Investors & Funders

Breakthrough Energy Ventures invests in climate technology including satellite-enabled environmental monitoring, with portfolio companies spanning observation, analytics, and application layers.

The European Space Agency provides funding through business incubation centers and innovation programs supporting commercial applications of Earth observation for sustainability.

Lombard Odier Investment Managers has allocated substantial capital to climate technology including remote sensing, reflecting institutional investor interest in the sector.

The European Commission funds satellite-enabled sustainability applications through Horizon Europe, the European Green Deal programs, and Copernicus downstream services.

Real-World Examples

Example 1: Unilever Satellite-Based Deforestation Monitoring

Unilever deployed satellite-based deforestation monitoring across palm oil, soy, cocoa, and paper supply chains, integrating Global Forest Watch alerts with supplier management systems. The implementation covers over 10 million hectares of supply chain-linked landscapes, enabling rapid response when deforestation is detected. By 2024, Unilever reported 98% traceability to mill level for palm oil, with satellite monitoring providing verification layer beyond supplier declarations. This deployment demonstrates enterprise-scale integration of satellite data into supply chain due diligence processes.

Example 2: Nestlé Forest Positive Commitment Verification

Nestlé's Forest Positive strategy incorporates satellite monitoring through partnership with Starling, Airbus's deforestation detection service. The company monitors priority sourcing landscapes for palm oil, cocoa, coffee, and soy, with satellite data feeding into supplier scorecards and procurement decisions. By 2024, monitoring covered sourcing regions representing 95% of commodity volumes. The approach demonstrates how satellite data connects to commercial consequences—suppliers demonstrating deforestation in their supply chains face sourcing reductions or termination.

Example 3: Microsoft Carbon Credit Due Diligence

Microsoft's carbon removal procurement requires satellite-based verification of forest carbon projects, establishing verification standards that influenced the broader voluntary carbon market. The company's 2024 carbon removal portfolio included only projects passing satellite-derived verification thresholds for additionality and permanence. This procurement approach creates market demand for high-integrity satellite verification, signaling to project developers and registries that satellite-based MRV represents the emerging baseline expectation.

Action Checklist

• Week 1-2: Disclosure Requirements Mapping — Identify all satellite-relevant disclosure requirements across CSRD, EUDR, voluntary commitments, and stakeholder expectations; prioritize by materiality and compliance timeline
• Week 3-4: Current State Assessment — Inventory existing environmental data sources and identify gaps where satellite data could provide verification, baseline establishment, or ongoing monitoring
• Week 5-6: Platform Evaluation — Assess 3-5 satellite data platforms against requirements; request demonstrations focusing on use cases most relevant to priority disclosure needs
• Week 7-8: Pilot Implementation — Deploy satellite monitoring for a defined scope (specific suppliers, commodity, or geography) with clear success metrics and methodology documentation
• Week 9-10: Uncertainty Quantification — Develop framework for communicating satellite-derived metric uncertainties to internal stakeholders and external reporting audiences
• Week 11-12: Integration and Governance — Establish data governance processes integrating satellite data into sustainability reporting workflows; define update frequencies and quality assurance protocols

FAQ

Q: How does satellite data support CSRD compliance specifically? A: CSRD requires disclosure under European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), several of which satellite data directly supports. ESRS E1 (Climate) benefits from satellite-verified emissions data, particularly for land-use related Scope 3. ESRS E4 (Biodiversity) requires habitat and ecosystem impact assessment that satellite land cover analysis provides. ESRS E5 (Resource Use and Circular Economy) incorporates material traceability that satellite monitoring enables for agricultural and forestry commodities. While CSRD does not explicitly mandate satellite data, audit assurance providers increasingly expect satellite-based evidence for claims that would otherwise require extensive ground verification.

Q: What accuracy can sustainability leads expect from satellite-derived carbon metrics? A: Accuracy varies by application. Forest carbon stock estimates typically carry ±15-30% uncertainty, improving with project-specific calibration and LiDAR integration. Land-use change detection achieves ±5-10% area accuracy at appropriate resolution. Methane emission detection accuracy ranges from ±10-25% depending on emission source size and atmospheric conditions. These uncertainty ranges exceed typical financial reporting precision expectations, requiring careful communication in disclosure contexts.

Q: How should organizations balance cost and coverage in satellite data procurement? A: Priority-based sampling offers a pragmatic approach. Organizations should apply comprehensive monitoring to highest-risk suppliers or regions while using periodic assessment for lower-risk contexts. Commercial data procurement should focus on gaps not addressed by free Copernicus or Landsat data. Volume commitments typically reduce per-unit costs by 30-50%, favoring organizations that can aggregate demand across multiple use cases or business units.

Q: What role does satellite data play in carbon offset due diligence? A: Satellite monitoring provides independent verification of forest carbon projects addressing additionality (baseline comparison), permanence (ongoing forest cover monitoring), and leakage (surrounding area assessment). Major offset buyers including Microsoft, Google, and Stripe now require satellite-based verification. For sustainability leads purchasing offsets, satellite data enables due diligence beyond registry documentation, identifying potential quality concerns before procurement rather than after public exposure.

Q: How should satellite data integrate with existing corporate sustainability systems? A: Integration typically follows one of three models: direct API integration with sustainability reporting software (Sphera, Salesforce Net Zero Cloud, etc.); vendor-managed monitoring with periodic reports feeding into internal systems; or custom analytics on cloud platforms (Google Earth Engine, Microsoft Planetary Computer) by internal teams. The appropriate model depends on internal technical capability, use case complexity, and resource constraints.

Sources

• Credence Research. "Remote Sensing Services Market Size, Growth and Forecast 2032." Credence Research, 2024.
• European Commission. "European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) Final Delegated Acts." Official Journal of the European Union, 2024.
• Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market. "The Core Carbon Principles." ICVCM, 2024.
• Global Forest Watch. "2024 Annual Forest Change Report." World Resources Institute, 2024.
• European Environment Agency. "EU Deforestation Regulation Implementation Monitoring." EEA Reports, 2024.
• GHGSat. "Global Methane Emissions Monitoring: 2024 Industry Report." GHGSat Inc., 2024.