The Challenge
A manufacturing facility produced 8,000 units annually, consuming 2,000 tons of raw materials (steel, plastics, components). The facility tracked energy and waste carbon but had no visibility into material supply chain emissions.
What Became Visible
Scope 3 (supply chain) carbon analysis revealed: steel sourcing = 150 tons CO2e (0.75 kg CO2e per kg, accounting for mining + smelting), plastic materials = 120 tons CO2e (0.60 kg CO2e per kg), imported components = 100 tons CO2e (0.50 kg CO2e per kg + transportation). Total Scope 3 material carbon = 370 tons CO2e annually — 40% of facility's total carbon footprint. This was nearly equal to facility's direct (Scope 1+2) emissions.
What Changed
Scope 3 emissions tracking established. Suppliers provided carbon footprints for materials. Sourcing decisions began incorporating supplier carbon intensity (not just price).
How it worked: The facility established supplier carbon reporting requirements. Suppliers with lower-carbon materials were prioritized in sourcing. For steel, a low-carbon EAF (electric arc furnace) supplier was preferred over high-carbon blast-furnace suppliers (+5–8% cost premium). Plastic suppliers with recycled content were selected where feasible.
Results
annual supply chain
of material sourcing
from low-carbon sourcing
from supplier optimization
Supply chain carbon is 30–45% of manufacturing emissions. Supplier selection based on carbon intensity can reduce total facility carbon by 10–20% more than operational efficiency alone.
Operational Reality
Most facilities discover Scope 3 emissions are 30–50% of total when they measure. Supplier optimization becomes the second-highest impact lever after direct energy efficiency.