.svg)
For a company, implementing a carbon trajectory is an ambitious but necessary project. It is necessary for several reasons: not only to contribute to the fight against global warming and its consequences, but also to ensure the long-term viability of the organization.
Because the consequences of global warming will inevitably impact business operations, which is one of the reasons why investors, like consumers, are now very attentive to companies' ESG indicators and decarbonization goals.
Added to this are regulatory obligations, such as the CSRD, which will require European companies to be transparent about this data and these objectives, and the CSDDD which will soon mandate the implementation and pursuit of a decarbonization trajectory.
However, embarking on a carbon project is complex, and before you start, it is best to avoid certain pitfalls. Here are the 10 most frequent mistakes.
1- Failing to integrate governance into the project
The first, relatively common mistake is to underestimate the importance of the carbon project. New regulatory obligations, however, tend to move the carbon file to the top of the priority list.
It is essential that your carbon project directly involves your company's management. Why? A carbon project requires the involvement of all your internal and external stakeholders. When management leads this project, it sends a clear message about the importance it places on it and facilitates the mobilization of all the actors who will need to contribute. Furthermore, management is directly affected by the results of your carbon strategy. Indeed, consumers and investors are particularly demanding regarding companies' environmental policies. A carbon project therefore has a strong impact on the company's long-term viability and its growth prospects.
The latest study conducted by Tennaxia on the level of corporate preparedness for the CSRD shows that 89% of the companies surveyed have included a member of the executive committee, management committee, or board of directors in their project team dedicated to this new non-financial reporting format.
2- Failing to structure your data beforehand
Do not start searching for data without first doing the work of structuring it. Ask yourself the right questions. How do I want to analyze this data? What data do I need? Where is it located? Who has access to it?
Modeling your organization is crucial before you begin the data collection phase.This involves, for example, listing all your offices and production sites, and classifying them by activity and/or by country.
In addition to this organizational modeling work, there is the work of create a category tree that will give you a granular view of your data. This then allows you to take precise action on the identified emissions.
For example, energy consumption in your French and German factories will not have the same carbon impact due to differences in the energy mix between the two countries. You must therefore enter this data into different categories so that you can subsequently apply the appropriate emission factor and act effectively (and likely differently) on these two sources of GHG emissions. The same applies to the purchase of raw materials; if, for example, you use both new and recycled materials, the emission factor that applies will be different. You must therefore have different categories for these two supply sources.
3- Forgetting to involve your stakeholders
Employees, suppliers… A carbon project, even if it is led by a dedicated person or team, requires the involvement of everyone within a company. Both internal and external stakeholders. This applies as much to the data collection required to measure your corporate carbon footprint as it does to the implementation of decarbonization actions.
The role of the project manager is to mobilize the stakeholders who will have a role to play in the decarbonization trajectory. Since these roles are often highly operational, it will be necessary to be educational from the start of the project to explain why it is important, what its objectives are, and why their contribution is necessary.
Not only is this step necessary for the effective implementation of your carbon project, but it will also allow you to make it more efficient by benefiting from the feedback and observations of the people directly involved in the field.
4 - Neglecting the reliability of collected data
The data you collect in your carbon footprint platform will subsequently allow you to measure your footprint. For this to be actionable, the data must be of high quality.
Whenever possible, always prioritize physical data over monetary data. More precise, this data can be re-analyzed later if emission factors change, ensuring better year-over-year comparability, and it is not at risk of being skewed by economic fluctuations such as inflation.
Extrapolating data can also present a risk. Often considered an easy solution when precise data is difficult to obtain, the widespread use of extrapolations can completely distort the results of your carbon project.
5- Skipping Scope 3
When done correctly, modeling your organization and category tree before data collection begins should provide a comprehensive view of the data you need to gather to measure your carbon footprint, at least for scopes 1 and 2.
However, do not assume your emissions stop at your company's front door. Measuring your scope 3 emissions is crucial. This covers emissions from your value chain, which includes all indirect emissions (upstream and downstream) resulting from your activities. Freight transport, raw material production, waste management—all these activities generate greenhouse gas emissions that are attributable to you.
Measuring scope 3 is especially important because it often accounts for the vast majority of a company's CO2 emissions, averaging 92% according to the CDP.
Furthermore, accounting for emissions generated by your value chain has become a requirement in most international non-financial reporting standards. Therefore, be sure to include scopes 1, 2, and 3.
6- Failing to plan for repeatability and comparability of results
Measuring your greenhouse gas emission levels is only useful if you intend to act on them and set a carbon trajectory. You must therefore ensure that you do everything possible to ensure the exercise can be repeated year after year, and above all, that the results remain comparable.
These principles are essential for setting GHG emission reduction targets over long periods. This requires a clear vision of the category tree that models your organization and the level of data granularity you wish to collect in order to effectively address the various emission sources.
7 - Starting without defining the appropriate methodology
There are various methods for measuring your carbon footprint. Depending on your specific challenges and obligations, you must choose the one best suited to your business model. These include the Bilan Carbone method supported by ADEME, the ISO 14064 standard, or the GHG Protocol. These carbon accounting methodologies, which are internationally recognized, allow you to meet the main non-financial reporting standards.
Keep in mind the importance of repeatability and comparability in your carbon footprint measurements. Changing your measurement method from one year to the next can prevent you from comparing your results and, ultimately, from accurately measuring the results of your carbon trajectory.
8 - Setting unrealistic goals
Setting overly ambitious goals—and worse, communicating them—will eventually only harm your image and credibility with your stakeholders. Don't fall into the greenwashing trap. Be pragmatic. Committing to a decarbonization plan inevitably requires investment. You must take into account the operational feasibility of the actions you wish to carry out, their costs, and their long-term amortization or profitability.
Tools, such as Traace's Reduce module, can help you build your carbon trajectory, estimate the impact of your actions on your carbon footprint, and model their costs. Methodologies, such as those from the SBTi, help you set science-based targets.
9 - Failing to set a precise timeline
Well-defined goals must be set within a clear timeframe. Without a schedule, it is tempting to constantly put off actions, while a timeframe that is too short can prevent the mobilization of the necessary human and financial resources and could even jeopardize your operations.
The EU, for example, aims to reduce its emissions by 55% by 2030 and reach carbon neutrality by 2050. This timeline, which aligns with the Paris Agreement, is the one that currently serves as the consensus for many economic and financial players.
10 - Confusing carbon contribution with carbon offsetting
In recent years, many companies have been tempted to integrate offsetting mechanisms into their carbon trajectory. Offsetting is a concept that is far too vague to be included in a serious carbon trajectory. It suggests that, by planting trees, you can maintain your current CO2 emission levels.
Far from disparaging project developers who generate carbon credits,carbon professionals prefer to speak of contribution rather than compensation. Purchasing carbon credits is considered a “bonus.” You are helping to fight global warming by investing in the development of carbon sinks, but this must be decoupled from the emissions generated by your activities.
From a strictly regulatory standpoint, most non-financial reporting standards do not take the purchase of carbon credits into account when measuring a company's GHG emissions. These may be mentioned, but only in separate categories to avoid confusing the company's emissions with its contribution efforts.
Conclusion
Successfully executing a carbon project requires foresight, rigor, and the involvement of all stakeholders. Avoiding common pitfalls—whether poor governance, inaccurate data collection, or poorly calibrated goals—is crucial to building a solid and sustainable carbon strategy. By relying on an appropriate methodology and setting realistic objectives, companies can not only meet regulatory requirements but also actively contribute to the fight against global warming while strengthening their long-term viability.