Disclosure focus
The practical focus is breadth and completeness rather than a few selected sites or activities. An organisation should think about whether its reporting covers all relevant operations and entities in the boundary, and whether the Scope 3 picture captures the material upstream and downstream sources that drive its footprint. The aim is to give a clear, comparable view of the organisation’s overall emissions profile, not just its best-performing or most visible locations.
This LRA educational guidance supports disclosure preparation. For the exact requirements, always refer to the official European Commission source.
Prepare
What to collect before drafting
Tick each field as the evidence lands. Owners are the teams that usually hold the source files.
-
Inventory boundary
Sustainability / Environmental reportingThe organisational and operational limits used to decide which emissions sources sit inside the inventory, including any exclusions or partial coverage.
Evidence Boundary memo, consolidation policy, entity list, operational control or equity share assessment, and inventory workbook mapping.
Watch for Boundary does not reconcile to the consolidation basis used in the inventory workbook, so entities or sites are included on a different basis than the emissions data.
-
Reporting period
Sustainability reporting / Finance controlThe exact start and end dates for the emissions data set being reported, and whether the figures are for a full year or another defined period.
Evidence Reporting calendar, close timetable, source-system extract dates, and the period stated in the emissions file.
Watch for Period-end and average or partial-period data are mixed, so the emissions total does not match the stated reporting window.
-
Direct emissions by source
Environmental reporting / OperationsA source-by-source split of direct emissions, showing each emission source type and its corresponding amount.
Evidence Fuel logs, process records, refrigerant registers, fleet data, and the emissions calculation workbook with source mapping.
Watch for Source categories are not aligned to the calculation workbook, so the split by source does not reconcile to the underlying activity records.
-
EU ETS share
Environmental compliance / Sustainability reportingThe portion of direct emissions that falls within the EU emissions trading scheme coverage, expressed as a share of total direct emissions.
Evidence EU ETS installation list, permit or registry records, allocation schedule, and the calculation showing the covered subset against the total.
Watch for The covered subset is calculated on a different boundary than the total direct emissions, so the share is overstated or understated.
-
Direct emissions total
Environmental reporting / Finance controlThe total direct greenhouse gas emissions for the reporting period, before any offsets or removals, in tonnes of CO2 equivalent.
Evidence Consolidated emissions workbook, source activity data, emission factors, and review sign-off from the reporting owner.
Watch for Gross and net figures are mixed, so the reported total does not reconcile to the source calculations before offsets.
-
Electricity contract basis
Energy procurement / Sustainability reportingThe contractual arrangements used to determine the indirect electricity emissions figure, including the instruments relied on and how they were applied.
Evidence Power purchase agreements, supplier contracts, certificates, residual mix evidence, and the market-based calculation file.
Watch for Contractual instruments are applied to sites or volumes they do not cover, so the market-based calculation does not reconcile to the contract register.
-
Grid-based electricity emissions
Sustainability reporting / Energy managementThe indirect emissions from purchased electricity calculated using the relevant grid-average approach for the reporting period.
Evidence Metered electricity consumption, grid emission factor source, calculation workbook, and period-end utility statements.
Watch for Location-based and market-based methods are mixed, so the figure does not reconcile to the grid-factor calculation.
-
Contract-adjusted electricity emissions
Energy procurement / Sustainability reportingThe indirect emissions from purchased electricity after applying the chosen contractual approach for the reporting period.
Evidence Metered consumption, contractual instrument schedule, residual mix or supplier factor evidence, and the market-based calculation workbook.
Watch for The contractual adjustment is applied to the wrong consumption volume or period, so the result does not reconcile to the electricity ledger.
-
Indirect emissions by category
Sustainability reporting / Supply chain reportingA category-by-category split of indirect emissions, with each included category and its amount shown separately.
Evidence Scope 3 category workbook, activity data by category, emission factors, and the consolidation file used to build the total.
Watch for Category labels are not aligned to the source workbook, so some emissions are double-counted or left out of the category split.
-
Included indirect categories
Sustainability reporting / ESG governanceWhich indirect emissions categories are included in the reporting set, and which are not, for the period reported.
Evidence Scope 3 boundary note, category inclusion matrix, materiality assessment, and reporting checklist.
Watch for A category is omitted from the inclusion list even though it is present in the calculation file, so the reported coverage is incomplete.
-
Indirect emissions method
Sustainability reporting / Technical accountingThe calculation approach used for indirect emissions, including the main data sources, estimation steps, and any assumptions applied.
Evidence Methodology note, calculation model, emission factor library, supplier data hierarchy, and review approvals.
Watch for The estimation method changes between categories or periods without being documented, so the calculation basis does not reconcile across the workbook.
-
Indirect emissions total
Sustainability reporting / Finance controlThe total indirect greenhouse gas emissions for the reporting period, before any offsets or removals, in tonnes of CO2 equivalent.
Evidence Consolidated Scope 3 workbook, category totals, source activity data, and final review sign-off.
Watch for Category totals do not roll up to the reported total, so the gross figure does not reconcile to the sum of included indirect emissions.
Before you start
- Have you fixed the reporting boundary for the emissions inventory, so you know which sites, operations and activities are in or out?
- Is the reporting year settled, including the cut-off date and whether the figures follow the same period as the rest of the report?
- For direct emissions, have you decided which sources to group them by, and whether any part sits under the EU emissions trading scheme?
- For purchased energy, have you chosen the basis for the numbers — grid-average, supplier-backed or another contractual route — and do you have both location-based and market-based figures?
- For value-chain emissions, have you agreed which upstream and downstream categories to include, how you will estimate them, and what method you will describe?
- Can every figure be traced back to a source record or calculation file, with the underlying evidence ready to support the totals and breakdowns?
How to prepare it
Request the data
Request the emissions data pack from the operational carbon owner
Translate the disclosure into an internal business question — then adapt it to your organisation's own language.
What are our gross greenhouse gas emissions for the reporting period, and what boundary, methods, and source data support the figures for direct emissions, purchased energy emissions, and value-chain emissions?
Use your organisation’s own labels first, then map them to the reporting categories. For example, ask for the carbon file, energy and fuel records, supplier emissions inputs, and the method note in the terms your teams already use. This is a training template only; adapt it to your organisation and check the source disclosure before sign-off.
Weak request
Please provide the Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 data for ESRS E1-8, including the gross emissions, the boundary, the contractual instruments, the location-based and market-based figures, and the category breakdowns.
Why it fails: It uses framework language that many operational owners will not use day to day, so it is harder to action. It also bundles the ask in reporting terms rather than the team’s own data objects, which makes it easier to miss the source files, method note, and mapping needed to verify the figures.
Better request
Please send the latest carbon file for [reporting period] covering the sites/entities in scope, plus the source files behind it. We need the direct emissions split by source, the electricity figures under both the grid-average and contract-based views, the value-chain split by category, the list of categories included, the method note, and any gaps or estimates. Please use your team’s own labels and add a short mapping note to the reporting pack.
Formal email template
Subject: Request for the emissions data pack for [reporting period]\n\nHi [name/team],\n\nPlease could you share the latest emissions data pack for [reporting period] for the operations and activities you cover?\n\nWe need the underlying file(s) and a short note covering:\n- which parts of the business are included\n- the period covered\n- the source system(s) or workbook(s) used\n- the method or calculation basis\n- the direct emissions split by source\n- the electricity emissions figures using both grid-average and contract-based views, where available\n- the value-chain emissions split by category\n- the categories included in the value-chain view\n- the method used to estimate any value-chain items\n- any exclusions, estimates, or data gaps\n- the supporting evidence or links to it\n\nPlease return the data in the attached response form, using your own internal terms where possible and adding a short mapping note so we can align it to the reporting pack. This is a possible LRA training template only; please adapt it to your organisation and check the source disclosure before sign-off.\n\nThanks,\n[preparer name]
Short Teams / Slack version
Hi [name/team] — could you send over the latest emissions data pack for [reporting period]? We need the boundary, period, source files, method note, direct emissions split, electricity figures, value-chain category split, categories included, any estimates/gaps, and links to the supporting evidence. Please use your team’s own labels and add a short mapping note. This is a possible LRA training template only; adapt it to your organisation and check the source disclosure before sign-off.
Industry examples
Manufacturing
Context. The plant team holds fuel, process, electricity, and logistics data in separate trackers.
Adapted request. Please share the plant carbon pack for [reporting period], including the site boundary, fuel and process emissions by source, electricity figures under both the grid-average and contract-based views, freight and other value-chain categories you track, the method note, and links to meter reads, invoices, and supplier files.
Example response. Boundary: 4 plants and 1 warehouse. Direct emissions by source: natural gas, diesel, process gases. Electricity: grid-average and contract-based views provided. Value-chain categories included: inbound freight, outbound freight, purchased materials, business travel. Method note: activity data x factors, with supplier estimates for two materials. Evidence links: utility invoices, fuel cards, freight reports, supplier statements.
Retail
Context. The estates and logistics teams manage stores, depots, electricity, refrigerants, and transport data.
Adapted request. Please send the retail emissions pack for [reporting period], covering stores, depots, and offices in the boundary, with refrigerant and fuel emissions by source, electricity figures under both views, logistics and other value-chain categories, the categories included, the calculation note, and the supporting files.
Example response. Boundary: all trading stores, 3 depots, head office. Direct emissions by source: gas, fleet fuel, refrigerants. Electricity: grid-average and contract-based views provided. Value-chain categories included: purchased goods, upstream transport, waste, business travel, customer delivery. Method note: meter data and invoices used where available; estimates applied to 2 small sites. Evidence links: utility portal exports, fleet cards, waste contractor reports, delivery logs.
Draft your disclosure
Notes that turn data into a disclosure
LRA training templates — adapt them to your organisation, and check the official source before sign-off.
Method note
State the reporting period, explain which parts of the business were counted, and describe the calculation approach used for the value-chain figures, including any contract-based electricity instruments and the categories that were included.
Context note
Explain what the numbers represent by separating direct emissions from electricity-related indirect emissions and wider value-chain emissions, and note whether the direct-emissions total includes any share linked to the EU trading scheme.
Fluctuation statement
If any figure moved materially, point to the operational or methodological driver behind the change, such as a shift in the business boundary, a different mix of sources or categories, or a change in the electricity calculation basis.
Content index entry
E1-8 Gross scope 1, 2, 3 GHG emissions — [location / page] / [notes]Download Centre
Preparation tools & forms
Download preparation tools for E1-8 with free verified email access for 24 hours. Source-report links remain public.
Check
For each claim, check the evidence
We set the coverage figure using the group and operational lines we applied in the calculation, and we can show why any entities, sites or activities were left out.
Risk Assurer checks whether the boundary was chosen consistently, whether exclusions were justified, and whether the same perimeter was used across the figures.
Evidence to check Boundary memo; consolidation map; list of included and excluded entities/sites; rationale for exclusions; sign-off from the reporting owner.
We prepared the emissions figure using the measurement approach described in our reporting notes, and we kept the working papers that show how the method was applied.
Risk Assurer probes whether the method was actually used as described, whether the approach is complete, and whether the narrative matches the calculations.
Evidence to check Methodology paper; calculation model; source data extracts; internal guidance on the chosen method; reviewer comments and approval trail.
We tied the reporting period to the same dates used in the published figure, and we can evidence how the cut-off was applied to the underlying data.
Risk Assurer checks whether the period is correct, whether late or early transactions were handled consistently, and whether the disclosed dates match the source records.
Evidence to check Reporting calendar; period-end cut-off instructions; data extraction timestamps; ledger or activity records; reconciliation to the published period.
We used the same year-end window for the disclosed emissions total and for the supporting calculations, and we can show the date range used in each dataset.
Risk Assurer probes whether the period is internally consistent across systems and whether any data outside the stated window was included or omitted.
Evidence to check Period definition note; system export dates; inventory workbook; exception log for out-of-period items; management review evidence.
We broke down the direct emissions figure by source type, and the split is supported by the underlying activity records and conversion steps.
Risk Assurer checks whether the source split is complete, whether categories are sensible, and whether the totals reconcile back to the headline figure.
Evidence to check Source-category mapping; activity data; emission factor file; calculation workbook; reconciliation from source lines to total.
Where we provided extra splits, we used the same underlying total and then allocated it by the relevant business lens we chose for the report.
Risk Assurer probes whether the extra disaggregation is based on a defensible basis, whether allocations are consistent, and whether the subtotals add up.
Evidence to check Disaggregation logic; allocation keys; segment or site reports; subsidiary mapping; subtotal-to-total reconciliation.
Evidence pack to prepare
Common reporting gaps
- Figures are stated without the supporting narrative, or narrative without figures.
- Scope is inconsistent between the text and the numbers.
- The reporting boundary is left undefined.
- Material changes since the previous period are not disclosed.
- Estimates and measured values are not distinguished.
- Source records for the figures are not identified.
Where drafts go wrong
Mistakes to avoid and where judgement is needed
The left column is what preparers get wrong while collecting; the right column is where you will have to make and explain a judgement.
Mistakes to avoid
- Wrong owner chasedThe request goes to the wrong team, so the person who holds the fuel, electricity, or supplier records never sees the data call.
- Framework language used too earlyPeople ask for the figures using reporting-framework terms instead of the business names used in day-to-day operations, and the source team cannot map the request to its own records.
- Boundary left vagueNo one states which sites, entities, or activities sit inside the collection set, so different teams pull different populations.
- Period basis not fixedThe team gathers numbers for the wrong months or uses a different cut-off date from the one used in the rest of the pack.
- Counting basis mixed upLocation-based and contract-based electricity figures, or source-level and total-level emissions, are blended together before anyone checks they belong on separate lines.
- Source labels stripped outThe original file names, ledger tags, meter IDs, or supplier references are lost during consolidation, making it hard to trace each figure back to its source.
- Separate populations mergedData from different business units, countries, or asset groups is rolled into one file even though it should stay split for review and sign-off.
- Evidence trail incompleteThe pack contains the numbers but not the supporting metadata, so reviewers cannot see who produced each file, when it was created, or which version was used.
- No sign-off recordThe final dataset is circulated without a clear approval trail, so nobody can show who checked the boundary, timing, and source files before submission.
Judgement needed
- Set the reporting perimeter after a buy-in or saleDecide whether the year includes the acquired or disposed operations from the date control changes, then explain the cut-off used and any restatement approach so the perimeter is clear.
- Handle mixed country methods with one group policyWhere local data systems or emission factors differ by country, pick one group-wide approach for combining them or explain any country-specific treatment and why it was needed.
- Draw the line for shared or partly controlled activitiesFor joint ventures, leased assets, outsourced services or other borderline activities, state the rule used to decide inclusion or exclusion and describe any material items near the edge of the perimeter.
- Choose the period basis and explain any timing mismatchIf operational data, utility bills or supplier information do not align exactly with the reporting year, disclose the basis used for the period and how late or early data were handled.
- State when estimates replace direct readingsExplain which figures came from metered or supplier data and which were estimated, including the method used for estimates and the main reasons direct data were not available.
- Separate source-level detail from the totalIf the organisation reports a breakdown by emission source or by category, make clear how the parts roll up to the total and how any grouping or simplification was applied.
- Explain the treatment of contractual electricity evidenceFor purchased power, disclose the instruments relied on, how they were matched to the consumption period and footprint, and what was done where the evidence did not fully cover the usage.
- Be explicit about rounding and aggregationState the rounding rule used for totals and sub-totals, and if privacy or confidentiality means some operational detail is combined, explain the aggregation level and any effect on comparability.
- Describe how the organisation handled scope 3 category choicesList the upstream and downstream categories included, note any categories left out because they were not material or data were not available, and explain the basis for those decisions.
Examples
How it reads on the page
Synthetic, written by LRA — not from a company report, not text from any standard.
we report our greenhouse-gas figures for the 12 months ended 31 December 2025, using a boundary that covers the company and the operations it controls. Our direct emissions are split by source, with a small share linked to EU carbon trading coverage, and our indirect electricity emissions are shown on both a grid-average and a supplier-contract basis; the wider value-chain total is set out by category, with the methods used to estimate each category noted.
Illustrative only; prepared for human review. This example shows how a reporter can describe the reporting boundary, the period covered, the split of direct emissions by source, the share exposed to EU ETS, the two electricity-based indirect measures, and the value-chain categories and methods used.
for the year ended 30 June 2025, we present emissions for the parts of the business we control, together with the indirect electricity figures under two calculation bases. We also list the value-chain categories we included, explain that supplier-specific data were used where available and otherwise spend- or activity-based estimates were applied, and break the totals into the main source groups.
Illustrative only; prepared for human review. This example shows a different sectoral profile, while still covering the reporting period, boundary, source split for direct emissions, EU ETS share, both electricity-based indirect measures, the included value-chain categories, and the estimation approach used for those categories.
Quality ladder
- Basic
I report 12,400 tCO2e for the year.
- Better
I report 12,400 tCO2e for 2025, split across our own operations, purchased energy and the wider value chain, with 3,100 tCO2e from direct sources, 2,400 tCO2e on a location basis, 2,100 tCO2e on a market basis and 6,900 tCO2e from upstream and downstream activities.
- Best
I report 12,400 tCO2e for 2025 across our own operations, purchased energy and the wider value chain, using our operational boundary, contract-backed electricity data, source-level direct emissions, both electricity calculation bases and category-level estimates for the value chain; the total is higher than last year because we added two previously uncounted supplier categories and expanded site coverage.
Check your understanding
Scenarios to work through
A preparer is compiling the year-end climate data pack for a group with several subsidiaries and one joint operation. The draft totals currently mix the whole group, but the reporting note is meant to cover only the entities and activities that sit inside the chosen reporting boundary for the year.
A finance manager has the annual electricity and fuel data ready, but the emissions workbook still shows last year’s calendar-year period. The current reporting cycle is a 15-month transition year, so the dates in the note no longer match the underlying activity data.
A manufacturing business has calculated direct fuel use from boilers and company vehicles, plus purchased electricity under both a location view and a contract-based view. The draft note shows only one electricity number and leaves out the contract information because the team thinks the market-based figure is enough on its own.
A group has mapped its value chain and identified several upstream and downstream emission sources, but only three categories are material. The draft narrative says the remaining categories were ignored, and the spreadsheet gives one combined total without showing which categories were included or how the estimates were built.
Ask the Knowledge Hub AI Assistant about this disclosure
Get practical answers for your reporting context.
Check your text
Paste one or two paragraphs. The fragment is used for this check only and is not stored in your conversation.
Peer comparison uses examples on this card, not prevalence in the report corpus.
Advice, not assurance
Framework references
Relevant ESRS requirements and related disclosures
ESRS
E1-8
within ESRS E1: Climate Change
Related & explore
More in ESRS E1 →Browse full catalogue →Search all disclosures →
FAQ
Questions this page answers
Use the page’s plain-language explainer, then work through the step-by-step preparation section, the datapoints list, and the draft-output section. The page is designed to help you collect the right inputs, shape a first draft, and build an evidence pack for review.
The page lists the datapoints to prepare, including inventory boundary, reporting period, direct emissions by source, EU ETS share, direct emissions total, electricity contract basis, grid-based electricity emissions, contract-adjusted electricity emissions, indirect emissions by category, included indirect categories, indirect emissions method, and indirect emissions total. Use that list as your collection checklist before drafting.
Those are two of the datapoints the page tells you to prepare, so they should be fixed early and used consistently across the rest of the disclosure. The page does not add extra rules, so treat them as core setup items for your working draft.
Ask for direct emissions by source, the direct emissions total, and any EU ETS share that needs to be shown. The page also points you to the evidence pack and assurance claims, so you can request supporting records at the same time.
The page says to prepare the electricity contract basis, grid-based electricity emissions, and contract-adjusted electricity emissions. That means you should collect the underlying contract information and the emissions figures needed to show both the grid-based and adjusted views in your draft.
The page asks you to prepare indirect emissions by category, the included indirect categories, the indirect emissions method, and the indirect emissions total. Use those items to define what is in scope, how it is calculated, and how the total is presented.
The page includes six assurance claims to verify and an evidence pack with five items for assurance readiness. Use those sections together to build a file that links each key claim to the supporting records before review.
The page has a section on common reporting gaps and mistakes, so it is meant to help you spot weak points before sign-off. Use it as a pre-submission check against your draft, your data table, and your evidence pack.
The Download Centre includes a Prep & Assurance workbook in .xlsx format and a printable Library Card in .pdf format. Use the workbook to organise preparation and assurance work, and the library card as a quick reference while drafting or reviewing.
Yes, the page includes synthetic illustrative example disclosures, including a quantitative data table, to show how the disclosure can be presented. Treat them as examples only and adapt them to your own data and boundary.
The draft-output section gives visualisation ideas, narrative starters, and a content-index line. Use those prompts to turn your collected data into a first-pass narrative and a structured draft for internal review.
More questions this page can help with