SB 261 · TCFD-Aligned Report
TCFD & SB 261 Aligned · Resilient Strategy · Proactive Since 2020
The TCFD framework organizes climate disclosure into four pillars: how we govern climate issues, our strategy for addressing them, how we manage risks, and how we measure progress. This summary shows Glaukos's position across all four.
Why intensity metrics? Intensity measures emissions relative to revenue — allowing meaningful comparison across years regardless of company growth.
Proactive since 2020 · Aligned with TCFD & SB 261
Climate oversight flows from Board level through management to operational integration, ensuring accountability at every level. This structure was formalized in 2020 when the CNG Committee charter was updated to include sustainability oversight.
Glaukos began formal climate reporting in 2019 — years before California's SB 253/261 laws were enacted (2023). This timeline demonstrates proactive commitment rather than reactive compliance, building governance infrastructure incrementally as the company grew.
Physical & Transition Risks · Scenario-Resilient Approach
Transition risks arise from the shift to a low-carbon economy — including new regulations, changing customer expectations, and market shifts. Physical risks (shown on right) stem from climate change impacts like extreme weather events. Companies must address both.
These projections show how fire season length may increase under different global emissions pathways. SSP1-2.6 assumes aggressive climate action, SSP2-4.5 reflects middle-of-the-road policies, and SSP5-8.5 represents continued high emissions. Glaukos tests strategy resilience across all scenarios.
Systematic SB 261/TCFD-Aligned · Integrated into ERM
This systematic process identifies climate risks through multiple data sources, quantifies their potential impact using standardized severity scoring, and manages them through diversification and strategic investments. A score of 9 or below (out of 25) indicates risks manageable within normal business operations.
Our assessment draws on peer-reviewed climate models (CMIP6), IPCC-aligned scenarios, and real operational data — not just qualitative judgment. This multi-source approach ensures risks are identified comprehensively and quantified consistently.
Foundational Metrics · Efficiency Wins · Growth-Aligned Targets · TCFD/SB 253-Aligned
Scope 1 covers direct emissions from our facilities and vehicles. Scope 2 covers indirect emissions from purchased electricity — which represents most of our footprint due to energy-intensive cleanroom operations required for medical device manufacturing.
Rather than setting arbitrary targets, we're building measurement capability first — ensuring any future commitments are credible and achievable. This is especially important given operational constraints: medical device manufacturing requires controlled cleanroom environments with high air turnover, limiting opportunities for energy reduction without regulatory revalidation.