Resources
The 5 Most Common Mistakes in GHG Reporting—and How to Avoid Them
2025-06-24
GHG Inventory Knowledge

Common mistakes in GHG reporting

Understanding your company’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is a key part of sustainable operations—but many businesses still get it wrong. Mistakes in GHG reporting don’t just skew internal metrics; they can lead to regulatory risks, poor investment decisions, and damaged reputation. Here’s how to avoid the most common errors.

1. Mistake: Overlooking Scope 3 Emissions

  • Many companies only report Scope 1 (direct) and Scope 2 (indirect from energy) emissions, ignoring the often largest category: Scope 3 emissions from the supply chain. These include upstream materials, transportation, and even product use.
    Fix: Start with a supply chain emissions map to identify hotspots. Focus on major contributors first—like purchased goods, business travel, or freight.

2. Mistake: Using Outdated or Generic Emission Factors

  • Default emission factors can be overly simplified or outdated. For example, “1 kWh = X kg CO₂” doesn’t account for regional electricity mixes or fuel-specific emissions.
    Fix: Use updated and activity-specific factors from recognized databases. Tailor emission calculations to local contexts for better accuracy.

3. Mistake: Manual Reporting and Spreadsheet Errors

  • Spreadsheets are prone to version control issues, hidden formula errors, and inconsistent formats, leading to reporting mistakes and inefficiencies.
    Fix: Use a centralized carbon accounting platform that automates calculations, tracks changes, and stores verifiable audit trails.

4. Mistake: Not Documenting Assumptions

  • If your reports lack transparency about data sources, calculation logic, or boundary definitions, they lose credibility—especially in audits or ESG ratings.
    Fix: Keep a log of all data assumptions, estimation methods, and organizational boundaries used. Include this in your final GHG report.

5. Mistake: Mixing Different Types of Data Without Clarity
  • Not all emissions data is the same—some are directly measured, others are estimated or based on industry averages. When these are combined without clear labeling, your final numbers can become misleading.
    Fix: Be transparent about the origin of each data point. Clearly distinguish between measured, estimated, and assumed values in your reports. This helps stakeholders understand the confidence level of your results and supports more informed decision-making.

By addressing these issues early, businesses can ensure more accurate, transparent, and actionable GHG reports—supporting both compliance and sustainability goals.

More Clients

Learn how the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) helps companies set and validate science-aligned climate targets. Step-by-step process, benefits, updates, and net-zero guidance.

Knowledge

Learn what CDP (Carbon Disclosure Project) is, how it works, and why environmental disclosure matters in 2024. This Q&A article explains questionnaires, scoring, recent updates, and business benefits.

Knowledge

Learn the key differences between CSRD and ESG. Understand CSRD reporting requirements, ESRS standards, and how to prepare for sustainability compliance under EU law.

Knowledge

Learn how EcoVadis evaluates your sustainability efforts and discover actionable steps to improve your rating, including documentation, digital tools, and supplier engagement strategies.

Knowledge

Discover how AI-powered carbon tools replace slow manual reporting with fast, accurate emissions tracking. Learn why digital automation improves decisions and drives low-carbon strategies.