Reduction of GHG emissions

Please provide the GRI 305-5 data and evidence for reductions in GHG emissions, including the baseline, gases, methodology, and offsets.

Why it fails: It uses framework language that many operational teams do not use day to day, so the owner may not know which project files, dashboards, or calculations to pull. It also does not point to the specific workstream, system, or comparison point, which makes the response slower and less reliable.

Please send the emissions-cut evidence pack for [initiative/workstream] in [reporting period], including the reduction figure, the comparison point used, the gases included, the calculation method or tool, any offset or credit treatment, and the supporting files from your usual system.

Explain which gases were counted, what reference period was used, why that reference point was chosen, which reduction categories are included, and which methods, assumptions and tools were applied to calculate the figures.

Set out what the reported reductions mean in practice by distinguishing cuts achieved through the organisation’s own initiatives from any reductions linked to offsets, and by linking the numbers back to the selected baseline.

If the figures moved materially, describe the operational or methodological drivers behind the change, such as a different reference period, a revised calculation approach, or a shift in the mix of reduction measures.

Evidence pack to prepare

Common reporting gaps

We are using 2019 as our reference point because it is the first year with complete site-level energy data after a major plant expansion, so it gives us a stable comparison for our reduction work. In this synthetic example, our reported greenhouse gas cut from efficiency projects is 18,400 tCO2e, and a further 3,100 tCO2e comes from purchased offsets; the gases covered in the calculation are carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, and the figures relate to our direct operational emissions and our energy-related indirect emissions. - The reference year starts on 1 January 2019 and ends on 31 December 2019; the baseline is 92,000 tCO2e. - We used the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard, activity data from utility bills and meter reads, emission factors from recognised public datasets, and spreadsheet-based calculation tools with internal QA checks.

Synthetic illustration only. Shows how a reporter can explain the comparison year, why it was chosen, the starting point used for tracking progress, the gases included, the emissions categories covered, the amount cut through projects, the amount attributed to offsets, and the main calculation approach.

Our synthetic disclosure uses 2021 as the comparison year because it reflects the first full year after we completed a store network reset and gives a clean starting point for tracking progress. In this example, our own actions lowered emissions by 6,750 tCO2e, while offsets account for 1,250 tCO2e; the calculation includes carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and hydrofluorocarbons, and it covers direct fuel use, refrigerant leakage and purchased electricity. - The comparison period runs from 1 January 2021 to 31 December 2021, with a baseline of 28,500 tCO2e. - We relied on the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard, supplier and utility records, refrigerant logs, published emission factors, and a carbon accounting platform with documented assumptions and review steps.

Synthetic illustration only. Shows a different sector using a different comparison year and emissions profile, while still covering the same disclosure points: why the year was selected, the baseline, the date range, the gases counted, the emissions categories reported, the split between operational reductions and offsets, and the calculation approach.

A facilities team has cut electricity use and fuel burn across two sites, and the emissions team has calculated a 1,240 tCO2e drop against the chosen comparison year. Separately, the organisation also bought carbon credits, but those are tracked in a different part of the report.

A reporting manager is preparing the narrative and has data for carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, but the project team also wants to mention refrigerant gases because they were part of a cooling upgrade. The calculation file currently mixes all gases together without saying which ones were included.

An organisation changed its comparison point midway through a long-term energy programme. The team has a start date of 1 April 2019 and an end date of 31 March 2020 for the base period, but the draft report only says 'baseline year 2019/20' and gives no reason for choosing that period.

A manufacturing group reports a 9,800 tCO2e reduction from process changes and boiler upgrades. The draft methodology note says the figure was built using an internal spreadsheet, a recognised emissions method, and several assumptions about operating hours, but it does not say whether the reduction covers only direct emissions or also purchased electricity.