GRI 302: Energy 2016 · Topic Standard · Cross-sectoral
Disclosure GRI 302-5
Reductions in energy requirements of products and services
Practical guidance for preparing this disclosure. Use this card to identify datapoints, verify claims and organise supporting evidence. For exact requirements, always refer to the official GRI source.
Open official GRI source
↗ Share
Reviewed by
Dr Ross Kurinko · GRI Certified Trainer
To prepare this disclosure
4 datapoints ↓
4 claims to verify ↓
5 evidence areas ↓
3 report examples ↓
Disclosure focus
This disclosure asks an organisation to explain whether it has reduced the energy needed to produce, use, or deliver its products and services, and to describe those reductions in a way that is meaningful to readers. The focus is on actual improvements in energy performance, not just general energy-saving intentions or isolated efficiency projects.
In practice, the key question is how broadly those reductions apply across the business. Reporters should be clear whether the changes cover the whole portfolio, a specific product line, a service, or only selected sites or flagship operations, and should avoid implying that a limited example represents the organisation as a whole.
* This LRA educational guidance supports disclosure preparation. For the exact requirements, always refer to the official GRI source.
Before you start
A quick mental checklist before you prepare this disclosure — tick each as you settle it.
Preparation
Key datapoints to prepare
| Datapoint | What to capture | Evidence hint | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Product energy savings | Record the energy reduction achieved in the reporting period from products and services sold, using the period covered by the report and the same basis used for the calculation. | Calculation workbook, product/service performance data, sales records, and any engineering or customer-use assumptions used to derive the reduction. | Product management / Sustainability / Finance |
| Calculation basis | State the method or reference point used to work out the energy reduction, including what comparison, baseline, or measurement approach underpins the number. | Method note, calculation model, baseline definition, and supporting technical papers or internal approvals for the chosen approach. | Sustainability / Engineering / Finance |
| Basis selection reason | Explain why this calculation basis was chosen instead of other possible approaches, focusing on the practical reason it best fits the reported reduction. | Internal memo, methodology approval note, project rationale, or governance paper showing why the chosen basis was selected. | Sustainability / Engineering / Product management |
| Calculation method details | List the standards, methods, assumptions, and any tools used to calculate the energy reduction, including the specific version or model where relevant. | Methodology document, assumptions log, tool output, version-controlled model, and any external or internal standard references used in the calculation. | Sustainability / Engineering / Data / Finance |
Show GRI 302-5 sub-elements (LRA working checklist)
- Set out the reference point used to work out the cut in energy use.
- Explain why that reference point was selected.
- State the energy-demand reduction achieved in products and services sold during the reporting period.
- Identify the standards, methods, assumptions, and/or calculation tools applied.
LRA working checklist - paraphrased; see official source
How to prepare
- Set the reporting boundary first: decide which sold products and services are in scope for the period, and keep that scope consistent with the figures you will report.
- Define the calculation basis you will use to measure the energy reduction, using a clear business rationale for why that basis is the right one for this disclosure.
- Gather the supporting records that show the reduction achieved during the reporting period, together with the working papers or source data behind the calculation.
- Compile the reported result and the explanatory narrative, including the method used, the assumptions applied, and any calculation tools or models relied on.
- Record any exclusions, scope changes, or restatements so a reviewer can see what was left out, what changed, and why the reported figure is still comparable.
- Check the final disclosure back against the official source to confirm the wording, basis, rationale, and method details are all covered and nothing required has been missed.
Request the product energy-saving evidence
Translate the disclosure into an internal business question — then adapt it to your organisation's own language.
What evidence do we have for the energy-use improvements achieved by products or services sold in the reporting period, and what method was used to calculate them?
Use your organisation’s own product, service and performance language first, then map it to the reporting disclosure. Keep the ask in terms your product, engineering, technical, or innovation teams already use, and check the source guidance before sign-off.
Weak request
Can you send the GRI 302-5 data and evidence for energy reductions in sold products and services?
Why it fails: This uses framework language that may not match how the product or engineering team tracks the work, and it does not specify the comparison basis, method, assumptions, source files, or the internal labels needed to validate the figures.
Better request
Can you send the evidence pack for the energy-use improvements achieved by [product/service line] in [reporting period]? Please include the comparison point, how the improvement was calculated, why that approach was chosen, the assumptions and tools used, and the supporting test or model files.
Formal email template
Subject: Request for product energy-saving evidence for [reporting period] Hi [name/team], We are preparing the sustainability reporting pack and need your help with the evidence behind the energy-use improvements achieved by [product/service line] during [reporting period]. Please send: - the figures for the energy-use improvement achieved in the period - the basis used to calculate the improvement - the reason that basis was chosen - the standards, methods, assumptions, and any calculation tools used - the supporting file(s), test report(s), model(s), or source data Please also include the scope covered, the comparison point used, and any notes needed to interpret the result. A possible LRA training template is attached below; please adapt this to your organisation’s own terms and check the source guidance before sign-off. Thanks, [preparer name] [team]
Short Teams / Slack version
Hi [name/team] — could you share the evidence pack for the energy-use improvements in [product/service line] for [reporting period]? Please include the calculation basis, why that basis was used, the method/assumptions/tools, and the supporting files. Please use your team’s own terms and send the source documents too. Thanks.
Industry examples
Consumer electronics
Context. A team tracks firmware and hardware changes that reduce power draw in a device range.
Adapted request. Please share the evidence pack for the lower power use achieved by [device range] during [reporting period]. Include the comparison version, the calculation method, the reason for using that method, the assumptions, and the test reports or model files.
Example response. The team returns a table showing each device model, the prior version used as the comparison point, the measured reduction in average power draw, the internal test method, the assumptions on usage profile, and links to the lab reports and spreadsheet model.
Industrial equipment
Context. A service and engineering team tracks efficiency gains from a redesigned machine sold to customers.
Adapted request. Please send the evidence behind the reduced energy use of [machine/service package] sold in [reporting period]. Include the baseline machine configuration, the basis used to calculate the improvement, the reason for that basis, and the engineering notes, simulation outputs, or field-test records.
Example response. The team provides a summary by machine variant, the baseline configuration, the calculated reduction in energy use, the chosen comparison method, the rationale for using field-test data, and references to the simulation file and customer trial report.
The full request pack — response form, data table, evidence metadata and sign-off — is in the Download Centre.
Draft your disclosure
LRA training templates — adapt them to your organisation, and check the official source before sign-off.
Method note
Set out the basis used to work out the energy reduction, and explain why that approach was selected, including the methods, assumptions and tools applied.
Context note
Explain what the reported reduction means in practice for products and services sold during the year, so readers can understand the scale and relevance of the result.
Fluctuation statement
If the figure moved materially from the prior period, describe the main reasons for the change, such as a different calculation basis, revised assumptions or updated tools.
Content index entry
GRI 302-5 Reductions in energy requirements of products and services — [location / page] / [notes]
Download Centre
Professional preparation tools and forms for GRI 302-5. Each download includes a concise “How to use” guide.
Assurance readiness
For each claim, check the evidence
| Claim | Risk | Evidence to check |
|---|---|---|
| We calculated the figure from the products and services we sold in the period, using the same approach throughout the dataset. | An assurer will test whether the reported reduction is actually based on the stated sales set, whether the period covered is consistent, and whether the method was applied uniformly rather than selectively. | Working papers showing the sales population used, the calculation file, period cut-off rules, and review notes confirming the same approach was applied across the full set. |
| We set out the calculation basis in our working papers before publication and used that basis consistently in the final number. | An assurer will probe whether the basis was defined in advance, whether it matches the disclosed figure, and whether any late changes were made without control. | Method note, version history, approval trail, and the final calculation workbook showing the basis used and any amendments. |
| We chose that calculation basis because it best matched the way the underlying sales data and energy-related effects could be measured with available records. | An assurer will ask whether the chosen basis is justified, whether it is suitable for the available data, and whether the rationale was documented rather than chosen after the fact. | Internal rationale paper, data availability assessment, comparison of alternative approaches, and sign-off from the preparer or reviewer. |
| We relied on documented methods, stated assumptions, and calculation tools, and we checked the output before release. | An assurer will examine whether the method, assumptions, and tools are identifiable, whether they were used as described, and whether the final output was subject to quality checks. | Methodology document, assumption log, tool or model files, input-output checks, reconciliation to source records, and evidence of pre-publication review. |
Evidence pack to prepare
- The governing policy or written commitment behind this disclosure
- A methodology / definition note setting out how the disclosure was scoped and prepared
- Source-system exports the figures or facts were drawn from
- The internal approval / sign-off record for the disclosure before publication
- Minutes or records evidencing the relevant engagement or consultation
Common reporting gaps
- The information is presented without a date or as-at point.
- The scope or boundary of the statement is left undefined.
- Key terms are used inconsistently across the report.
- Material changes since the previous period are not disclosed.
- Assertions are made without supporting detail or a source record.
- Boilerplate is used that does not actually answer what is asked.
Mistakes to avoid when collecting the data
- Wrong owner, wrong desk
Teams ask a framework lead or sustainability contact instead of the product, engineering, or service owner who can explain how the energy-saving figure was built.
- Using framework language too early
People request the data in reporting terms rather than the organisation’s own operational labels, so the source team cannot map the request back to their records.
- No clear boundary for what is included
The request does not pin down which products, services, or product lines sit inside the scope, so different teams collect different populations.
- Wrong period or timing basis
The team pulls figures from a different reporting window or from a launch date basis that does not match the period being reported.
- Mixing unlike calculation bases
Results built on different reference points, methods, or assumptions are added together even though they were not calculated on the same footing.
- Losing the original source labels
Once the numbers are copied into a tracker, the link to the source file names, version tags, or system labels is dropped and the trail cannot be traced back.
- Combining groups that should stay separate
Products, services, or calculation methods that need separate treatment are merged into one total, which hides differences in how the reductions were derived.
- Missing evidence details
The team keeps the headline figure but not the supporting notes on standards used, assumptions made, or the tool that produced the result.
- No sign-off trail
The final dataset is circulated without a named reviewer or approval record, so no one can show who checked the basis before it was passed on.
Where judgement is often needed
- Choosing the comparison point
Set out the starting point used to judge the change in energy use, explain why that baseline is the fairest one for your products or services, and adapt the explanation to your organisation’s own operating language.
- Defining the product or service set in scope
State how you decide which sold items or services are included, especially where offerings differ by country, customer segment, or channel, and explain any exclusions or edge-of-scope calls.
- Handling acquisitions, disposals, and redesigns
Explain whether you keep earlier figures as first reported or restate them after portfolio changes or product redesigns, and describe the rule you use so readers can follow the same approach year to year.
- Mixing measured data with estimates
If some figures come from direct readings and others from models or proxies, disclose where each method is used, why it was needed, and how you checked that the combined result is reasonable.
- Using different local definitions
Where local market rules or internal product definitions vary, describe the definition you applied for the calculation and note any material differences between countries or business lines.
- Timing the reduction claim
Make clear whether the change is judged at sale, during use, or over another period that fits your business model, and explain the timing choice so the reported reduction is not misleading.
- Rounding and aggregation choices
State the level at which you combine results and how you round them, especially where small product groups could be identified, so the published figure stays consistent with the underlying working papers.
- Protecting sensitive customer or product data
If detailed product-level information cannot be shown because of privacy or confidentiality limits, explain the aggregation level used and how it still supports the reported reduction figure.
- Selecting the calculation basis and toolset
Describe the calculation basis, assumptions, standards, and tools you used, and explain why that method best fits your organisation’s products, services, and available evidence.
Examples
Illustrative examples
Synthetic, written by LRA — not from a company report, not text from any standard.
Consumer appliances · synthetic · written by LRA
This is a synthetic narrative example showing how a reporter might explain the energy savings from products sold, the comparison basis, why that basis was chosen, and the methods and assumptions used.
Synthetic illustration only. During the year, we estimated that our sold products used 12,000 MWh less electricity in use than the prior design baseline, based on a comparison of the average annual energy draw of the current model range against the 2023 reference range.
- We used the annual electricity use per unit as the comparison basis because it best reflects how customers actually operate the products over a typical year.
- The estimate was built from product test data, engineering calculations, and a lifecycle assessment tool, with assumptions on average usage hours, load settings, and product mix held constant across the two model ranges.
Commercial lighting · synthetic · written by LRA
This is a synthetic narrative example showing a second plausible way to describe the energy reduction achieved by sold products, the calculation basis, the reason for using it, and the tools and assumptions applied.
Synthetic illustration only. For the reporting period, our sold lighting controls were estimated to cut 8,400 MWh of electricity use compared with the prior product generation, measured by comparing the expected yearly energy demand of installed units under a standard operating profile.
- We chose yearly electricity demand per installed unit as the yardstick because it gives a like-for-like view of customer energy use across different project sizes.
- The calculation relied on laboratory performance tests, customer installation data, and a spreadsheet model, using assumptions for operating hours, dimming patterns, and the share of units in each product family.
Draft output & visualisation ideas
How to turn the collected data into a draft disclosure. Suggested visuals and a GRI content-index line generated from this disclosure's datapoints.
Suggested visuals
- Energy savings achieved on sold offerings — table: The reported reduction in energy needs delivered by products and services sold during the period, alongside the calculation basis used for the figure.
- How the reduction figure was built — stacked bar: The components, assumptions and tools that feed into the estimate of lower energy use from sold products and services.
- Why this calculation approach was chosen — bar: The stated reason for using the selected basis rather than another approach, shown as a simple comparison of options or drivers.
- Methods and inputs used in the estimate — table: The standards, methods, assumptions and calculation tools applied to derive the reported reduction.
From a number to a disclosure
What separates a figure from a disclosure.
Basic
We cut the energy needed by our sold products and services by 12% this year.
Better
We cut the energy needed by our sold products and services by 12% this year, measured against last year’s sales mix using product-use estimates and our internal calculation model.
Best
We cut the energy needed by our sold products and services by 12% this year versus last year’s sales mix, using product-use estimates, our internal model and the same calculation approach throughout, and the improvement was mainly due to a more efficient product design and updated usage settings.
Real reports where this topic is disclosed. The confidence label shows how closely each match maps to GRI 302-5 — these are report practice, not exact disclosure examples.
| Company | Sector · Country | Year | Match | Page | Report | Assurance | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |
Abertis | Ground Transportation — Highways and Railtracks · Spain | 2024 | Partial | p. 256 →p. 259 →p. 260 → | Abertis Annual Report 2024 → | KPMG | |||||||||||||||
Evidence in Abertis’s reportWhat the report shows Abertis’ 2024 Annual Report provides specific data on energy consumption, notably reporting zero fuel consumption from coal and coal products for 2022 to 2024 (p.115). The report also references gross emissions from direct electricity consumption within the context of its 2022-30 sustainability strategy and ESG plans (p.116). However, there is no clear methodological explanation or detailed narrative on energy consumption beyond these points, and some expected narrative items are not found or remain unclear.
Evidence-based summary of this company’s own report — not a disclosure template to copy, and not a compliance verdict. Datapoint coverage
Source trail
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
CAE Inc. | Aerospace and Defense · Canada | 2024 | Partial | p. 30 →p. 166 →p. 167 → | FY24 Global Annual Activity and Sustainability Report → | ey | |||||||||||||||
Evidence in CAE Inc.’s reportWhat the report shows CAE Inc.’s FY24 Global Annual Activity and Sustainability Report provides detailed data on energy consumption, including total energy consumed reported as 1,048,295 GJ on page 183 and references to energy consumption reduction efforts on pages 51-52 and 167. The report also discloses Scope 2 location-based indirect GHG emissions, with values such as 57,256 t CO2e noted on page 168, and mentions the use of the GHG Protocol for emissions calculations (p.168). However, there is no clear evidence found regarding revenue from alternative energy-related products, which is reported as zero on page 185, and some narrative items remain unaddressed or unclear in the report.
Evidence-based summary of this company’s own report — not a disclosure template to copy, and not a compliance verdict. Datapoint coverage
Source trail
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
Sands China Ltd. | Hotels, Restaurants, Leisure, Tourism Services · Macao | 2025 | Partial | p. 52 →p. 33 →p. 32 → | 2025 ESG Report → | EY | |||||||||||||||
Evidence in Sands China Ltd.’s reportWhat the report shows Sands China Ltd.'s 2025 ESG Report provides detailed data on energy consumption, including total energy consumed (5,577,682 GJ) and the percentage of grid electricity used (55%) on page 54, as well as energy intensity ratios covering all applicable energy sources on page 31. The report also references reductions in energy requirements of products on page 52 and discusses energy-efficiency initiatives with performance data available on page 61. However, there is no clear methodology or narrative explaining these figures, as no quotable evidence was found for narrative item (c).
Evidence-based summary of this company’s own report — not a disclosure template to copy, and not a compliance verdict. Datapoint coverage
Source trail
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Check your understanding
A product team has launched a revised appliance that uses less electricity in normal use than last year’s version. The sustainability draft says the saving is 12%, but the team has not yet agreed what comparison point was used or which calculation method sits behind the figure.What should the preparer confirm before including the saving in the disclosure?
Model answer. They should first pin down the reference point used to measure the change in energy use, then explain why that reference point was chosen. They also need to set out the method, assumptions and any tool used to produce the figure, so the reported reduction can be traced and understood.
Why this matters. A reduction figure is not enough on its own; the basis, the reason for that basis, and the calculation approach all need to be clear.
A company sold a software update that lowers the power draw of an existing device fleet. The draft report describes the improvement in broad terms, but the underlying spreadsheet compares the updated version with a different model family because that was the only dataset available.Should the preparer use that comparison basis, and if so, what must be explained?
Model answer. They can use a practical comparison basis if it is the one chosen for the calculation, but they must explain exactly what it is and why it was selected. The report should also describe the standards or methods applied, the assumptions made, and any calculation tool used, so readers can judge whether the approach is sensible and consistent.
Why this matters. If the comparison basis is not the most obvious one, the report still needs to show what was used and why it was the right choice for the calculation.
A manufacturer has measured lower electricity use from a redesigned household device and wants to report the result. The team has figures from engineering tests, but the draft note does not say whether those tests were the basis for the reported saving or whether any modelling was used to convert test results into a customer-use estimate.What information must the preparer add to make the disclosure complete?
Model answer. They should state the basis used to calculate the reduction, such as test data, modelling, or another defined approach, and explain the reasoning for choosing it. They should also identify the standards, assumptions and tools used so the reported saving is not presented as a bare number without context.
Why this matters. Readers need to know both the source of the calculation and the logic behind choosing it.
A business has improved the energy performance of a sold service package and can show a lower energy requirement during the year. The draft disclosure gives the percentage reduction, but it does not say whether the figure comes from a recognised method, internal assumptions, or a specific calculation tool.What should the preparer do before finalising the disclosure?
Model answer. They should describe the method or standard used, note any assumptions that shaped the result, and identify the calculation tool if one was used. That way, the reported reduction is supported by a transparent trail from the underlying data to the final figure.
Why this matters. A credible reduction disclosure shows how the number was built, not just the end result.
Analyse this disclosure across real reports
See how companies actually report GRI 302-5 — drawn from their own published reports, with the exact pages, and an LRA AI-assistant that works through it with you. Available to LRA Community members and to students throughout their platform access.
Related framework references
How this disclosure maps across the major reporting frameworks.
→
ESRSRelated
ESRS E1
Climate Change — closest topical match (post-Omnibus ESRS catalogue).
→
IFRSNo equivalent
—
No direct IFRS S1/S2 topical equivalent.
Related & explore
Questions this page answers
What do I need to gather before drafting GRI 302-5 Energy for product energy savings?
The page says to prepare four datapoints: product energy savings, calculation basis, reason for the basis selected, and calculation method details. Use the step-by-step preparation section to turn those into a draft and keep the evidence pack ready for review. ↑ section
How do I decide the calculation basis for the GRI 302-5 Energy disclosure on product energy savings?
The page asks you to record the calculation basis and the reason for choosing it, so the key is to be explicit and consistent. The guidance is set up to help you explain the basis in plain language and support it with evidence. ↑ section
What should I include in the calculation method details for GRI 302-5 Energy?
The page says to capture calculation method details alongside the basis used, so the disclosure can be understood and checked. The step-by-step section and the illustrative examples are there to help you turn the method into a draft narrative. ↑ section
Who should own the data for product energy savings in GRI 302-5 Energy?
The page is designed for sustainability/ESG managers, HR or data owners, and assurance reviewers, so ownership should sit with the person or team that can explain the numbers and provide the evidence. Use the preparation steps and evidence pack to make responsibilities clear. ↑ section
What evidence do I need to make a GRI 302-5 Energy disclosure assurance-ready?
The page includes an evidence pack with five items and four assurance claims to verify, each framed around claim, risk, and evidence. That gives you a practical checklist for building an assurance-ready file before the draft is finalised. ↑ section
What are the common mistakes people make when reporting GRI 302-5 Energy product energy savings?
The page lists common reporting gaps and mistakes, so it is useful for checking whether your draft is complete and internally consistent. It also helps you spot where the basis, method, or supporting evidence may need to be tightened up. ↑ section
How can I use the Prep & Assurance workbook for GRI 302-5 Energy?
The Download Centre includes a Prep & Assurance workbook in .xlsx format, which is intended to support preparation and assurance readiness. Use it alongside the page’s step-by-step guidance, evidence pack, and draft-output section. ↑ section
What can I take from the printable Library Card PDF for GRI 302-5 Energy?
The Download Centre also includes a printable Library Card in PDF format, which is useful as a quick reference while you prepare the disclosure. It sits alongside the workbook and the page’s plain-language explainer. ↑ section
How do I turn the GRI 302-5 Energy data into a draft disclosure?
The page has a draft-output section with visualisation ideas, narrative starters, and a GRI content-index line. That makes it easier to move from the datapoints and method into a first draft for review. ↑ section
Can I reuse GRI 302-5 Energy data for ESRS E1 (Climate Change)?
The page notes ESRS E1 (Climate Change) as the closest correspondence, so the data may be reusable across reporting work. It does not say the requirements are identical, so you still need to check the other framework separately. ↑ section
More questions this page can help with
- What are the four datapoints to prepare for GRI 302-5 Energy product energy savings?
- Where on the page do I find the step-by-step guidance for preparing GRI 302-5 Energy?
- What is in the evidence pack for GRI 302-5 Energy assurance readiness?
- How do the claim, risk and evidence checks work on the GRI 302-5 Energy page?
- What kinds of reporting gaps does the GRI 302-5 Energy page warn about?
- How do I use the illustrative example disclosures on the GRI 302-5 Energy page?
- Does the GRI 302-5 Energy page include a content-index line I can adapt for a draft?
- What should I put in the narrative starter for a GRI 302-5 Energy draft?
- How do I explain the reason for the calculation basis in GRI 302-5 Energy?
- What should an assurance reviewer look for in the GRI 302-5 Energy evidence pack?
- Where can I find real company report examples for GRI 302-5 Energy on the page?
- Is there a downloadable workbook for preparing GRI 302-5 Energy?
✓ LRA AI Assistant · human-in-the-loop
Ask Study Studio AI assistant about this disclosure
Get a practical answer for your reporting context. Your first answer is free — create a free account to continue the conversation.
Try
Sources, status and disclaimer
This LRA assistance tool is designed for educational and internal data-collection purposes. It is not an official interpretation of the GRI Standards, IFRS Sustainability Disclosure Standards or EU CSRD/ESRS requirements. When applying these frameworks in professional practice, users should consult and double-check the official standards, guidance and applicable regulatory sources.
