Welcome back: David Kennedy's arrival at the Science Based Targets initiative comes at a complicated time for corporate climate action.

Some companies have rolled back their net-zero goals and cut mentions of climate from their public communications, as politicians including President Trump and investors have railed against the climate sector, describing it as a scam, launching lawsuits and cutting funding.

In an exclusive interview with WSJ Pro Sustainable Business—as London Climate Action Week opens—Kennedy highlights the importance of engaging hard-to-abate industries, such as oil and gas, heavy industry and chemicals, which are responsible for the majority of corporate emissions. However, he said taking a pragmatic approach would be key.

He also cements the charity’s position on carbon credits, highlighting three ways companies can have a holistic net-zero strategy.

Read on for more on this story plus other sustainability news. 

Sustainability efforts have been under attack recently, but many companies insist that the business case for pursuing net-zero emissions remains strong, the new leader of the nonprofit that sets climate action standards said.

The flow of companies signing up to have their transition targets validated by the Science Based Targets initiative shows many firms aren’t backing away from sustainability goals despite the political and investor backlash. Submissions to the SBTi are up 30% year to date, said David Kennedy, the nonprofit’s chief executive, and that comes after a record number last year.

“This is not about business doing the right thing,” said Kennedy, who took the top job at SBTi in March. “It is about business managing its transition risk and SBTi being part of that, which ultimately has benefits from the world. But those do need to align with the commercial realities and they can do. There is a sweet spot where science meets business, and it’s a win-win.”

Kennedy stressed he wants to take a pragmatic and nonconfrontational approach to companies that continue to work on cutting emissions, even if they fall short of targets.

“I think the principle that companies who have gone above and beyond should be able to get credit for that, that is important,” he said. “For those who’ve made serious efforts but have fallen a bit short, we are not in the shaming business.”

• Corporate Climate Targets Group Mulls Changes to Net-Zero Standard
• SBTi Details Possible Uses of Carbon Credits Despite Finding Little Evidence They Work
• It’s the Most Important Name in Sustainability. It’s Battling for Its Survival.

Ion Storage Systems’ solid-state batteries were inspired by hydrogen fuel-cell technology. The company’s high-energy-density batteries are now in production in a factory in Beltsville, Md. And though the U.S. is pulling back on investments in many energy technologies, a key backer is the Energy Department, the WSJ's Christopher Mims writes.

Solid-state batteries—which trade the gooey center of conventional lithium-ion batteries for a solid core—have the potential to improve smartphones and electric vehicles alike. Ion’s unusual approach could yield power cells that last 50% longer, charge significantly faster, and have a near-zero chance of catching fire when damaged.

However, that’s long been the promise in a field notorious for dashing the hopes of both startups and established giants. Despite decades of trying to make solid-state batteries commercially viable, we still haven’t seen any outside of niche applications. Automakers have announced partnerships with solid-state battery makers, yet none have moved beyond testing.

• How a Chinese-Owned Battery Maker’s Bet on U.S. EVs Went Wrong
• Unlikely Ingredient Could End U.S. Dependence on Chinese Batteries
• The Surprising New Source of Lithium for Batteries

The U.S. and European Union appear to be nearing a deal on multiple nontariff trade issues from deforestation rules to its carbon-based border tariffs—but the fate of looming tariffs set to be imposed by each trading partner remains unclear.

The draft text says the EU will delay implementation of its deforestation regulation for a year. That change in timing doesn’t appear to be new: The EU decided late last year to delay the deforestation rules after companies inside Europe and in other regions said they needed more time to comply.

The draft agreement would also see the U.S. and EU coordinate on Europe’s design and implementation of a carbon border adjustment mechanism—a tariff that would reflect the carbon-intensity of imports—and U.S. products would be exempted for a year after the policy is put in place. U.S. energy exports to Europe would also be exempt from EU methane rules.

But the text doesn’t specifically address any of the tariffs that President Trump has threatened or imposed on the EU—from the 20% reciprocal tariff that Trump paused in April to higher duties on specific industries like automobiles and steel, the people said. It also doesn’t detail the EU’s proposed retaliatory tariffs, set to kick in on July 14 if no deal can be struck.

• Europe Waters Down Flagship Climate Accounting Policy
• Europe Is Looking to Roll Back Climate Accounting Rules
• In Europe, You Can Be Sued for Not Taking Action on Climate Change. In the U.S., It’s the Opposite.

Tell me what you think: Send me your feedback and suggestions at perry.cleveland-peck@wsj.com or reply to any newsletter. If you were forwarded this newsletter, you can sign up here.

• Iran has an oil card to play. So does the U.S. (WSJ)
   
• Insurers want businesses to wake up to costs of extreme heat. (Bloomberg)
   
• Amazon buys more than 9 million liters of sustainable aviation fuel for cargo flights. (ESG Today)
   
• Mastercard and others eye new carbon credit to retire coal power. (Trellis)
   
• How a solar factory in the heartland sees the ‘Big Beautiful Bill.’ (Barron's)
   
• Octopus Energy, DTEK to raise $115 million for Ukraine solar and battery projects. (Reuters)
   
• Earth set to exhaust ‘carbon budget’ within three years as Paris hopes fade. (FT)
   
• Banning plastic bags works to limit shoreline litter, study finds. (NYT)
   
• Want to plant trees to offset fossil fuels? You’d need all of North and Central America, study finds. (AP)

WSJ Pro Sustainable Business gives you an inside look at how companies are tackling sustainability. Send comments to bureau chief Perry Cleveland-Peck at perry.cleveland-peck@wsj.com and reporters Clara Hudson at clara.hudson@wsj.com and Yusuf Khan at yusuf.khan@wsj.com. Follow us on LinkedIn at wsjperry, clara-hudson and yusuf_khan.