The WSJ’s “Companies Are Tallying Their Carbon Emissions, but the Data Can Be Tricky” discusses the challenges associated with reporting current Scope 3 emissions with any degree of accuracy based on experiences and input shared by Microsoft, Apple, Procter & Gamble, and McDonald’s. In its reportedly inaugural 2017 reporting (for 2016) of all of its carbon emissions, including Scope 3 emissions consisting of employee commuting, downstream transportation, use of sold products, and downstream leased assets, Microsoft cautioned that the Scope 3 numbers were based on “broad-based assumptions” and that this emissions category “may be under- or over-reported by as much as 50 percent.” Apple’s 2021 Environmental Progress Report notes with respect to its annual historical carbon footprint (through 2020) that it includes “a range for recently estimated emissions to reflect the potential variances inherent to modeling product-related carbon emissions” (p13).
Dartmouth College’s Tuck School of Business finance professor Anant Sundaram commented: “The measurement, target-setting, and management of Scope 3 is a mess. There is a wide range of uncertainty in Scope 3 emissions measurement … to the point that numbers can be absurdly off.”
The article identifies a lack of supplier emissions data and estimates relating to employee commuting patterns and customer use and disposal of products as among the bases for companies’ having to rely on estimates and assumptions.
See our recent report: “Scope 1, Scope 2, Scope 3 – Oh My!” and additional information & resources on our Climate Risk & Disclosure page.
This post first appeared in the weekly Society Alert!