Base year recalculation following facility closure

Science Based Targets
1

Due to the difficult economic climate one of our customers has to close down one of their facilities. They are now wondering if they can treat the reduction in emissions as actual reductions or not?

I initially responded that they would have to perform a recalculation of their base year. However, searching online for base year calculations, almost all sources mention a transfer of ownership such as aqcuisition/divestment. With a dissolution this is of course not the case and thus the emissions are also not undergoing a ‘transfer of ownership’. Does this mean this could be accounted for as a real reduction?

Added complexitiy in case of a base year recalculation: Part of their other facilities bought raw materials produced by the facility that will be closed. They will thus have to source this externally moving forward, meaning it will fall fully under Scope 3. For the potential base year recalculation should we treat this volume already as if it were sourced externally?

Thanks for your feedback!

2

Hi Jens,
How I understand it, all significant changes in company structure lead to a recalculation. As example they also mention divestments and others. If the impact i > 5% of total year emissions, then it seems to me a recalculation is needed.

On the recalculation itself, I did not find a lot of guidelines.
But in the previous calculation, you normally had an intercompany movement, that you do not need to double-count. If you exclude the facility that is providing the material, then you have to take into account the intercompany movement.
You could do that by using the real material/product emission from the closed facility. Or by using an external emission factor (or both and see what makes most sense, compared to the emission in current year). In both cases i suppose it would be scope 3.

Regards,
Tom

1 Like