Carbon Footprint of Construction Projects: A Guide to Decarbonizing Your Projects
Key points to learn in this article
• The construction industry accounts for approximately 25% of CO₂ emissions in France, 60% to 90% of which come from Scope 3 (materials, transportation, and subcontracting).
• Starting in August 2026, every public procurement contract must include a measurable environmental criterion accounting for between 10 and 30 percent of the final score.
• A construction project’s carbon footprint is not just a snapshot in time; it must become a tool for operational and financial management.
• Platforms such as Decarbo’Solution® enable companies to structure, measure, and effectively reduce their carbon footprint for each project.
• ⚖️The MACF has a direct impact on imported materials used in construction: steel, cement, and aluminum.
Contents
What is a construction site carbon footprint assessment in the building and construction industry?
The carbon footprint of a construction project involves quantifying all greenhouse gases (GHGs) generated by construction, renovation, or demolition activities. This assessment covers the entire project —from the extraction of raw materials to the demolition of the building, including the manufacturing of components, transportation, on-site construction, and waste management.
Contrary to popular belief, this assessment is not limited to direct emissions from the construction site. It also includes indirect emissions related to the supply chain, which account for the largest share of the total.
Definition
A project’s carbon footprint measures the direct and indirect CO₂ emissions associated with an operation. It is organized into three categories: Scope 1 (direct on-site emissions), Scope 2 (purchased energy), and Scope 3 (upstream and downstream value chain—materials, transportation, waste).
For construction companies, this approach has become much more than just a compliance exercise. It is a strategic tool for securing contracts, controlling costs, and preparing for the transition in the construction industry.
Why should you assess the emissions from your operations?
A Competitiveness Challenge for the Sector
The construction industry is one of the largest emitters in France. Accounting for approximately 25 percent of the country’s CO₂ emissions, the construction sector finds itself on the front lines. But beyond the environmental imperative, assessing a project’s carbon footprint—
—now addresses very concrete challenges for companies.
Sécuriser les appels d’offres publics. À partir du 21 août 2026, la Loi Climat et Résilience impose l’intégration d’au moins un critère environnemental mesurable dans chaque marché public. Le critère fondé sur un PCF (Product Carbon Footprint) conforme à la norme ISO 14067 pèsera entre 10 et 30 % de la note finale. Sans score auditable, une entreprise du secteur risque simplement l’exclusion.
Protecting profit margins in the face of carbon taxes. Starting in 2026, the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) will impose a tax on imports of steel, cement, and aluminum—materials widely used in construction. Without proof of these products’ actual carbon footprint, companies will be subject to highly punitive default values.
Meeting the requirements of clients. Large corporations, local governments, and project owners: all now require reliable environmental information from their service providers. The CSRD is intensifying this pressure across the value chain.
Did you know?
At Schmidt Groupe, structuring supplier data reduced Scope 3 uncertainty from 50% to just 5%, while identifying 242 metric tons of CO₂ that could be reduced in just a few weeks. This result demonstrates that a structured approach can generate a rapid return on investment for companies committed to decarbonization.
The Real Risks of Inaction
Failing to assess the impact of one’s operations exposes one to four simultaneous risks:
- Loss of business: Without an objective environmental rating, companies are gradually being excluded from competitive bidding processes.
- Erosion of margins: Uncontrolled costs related to the MACF and the ETS directly erode operating income.
- Competitive lag: Players who are already structuring their approach are gaining a lead that will be difficult to close.
- Regulatory Noncompliance: CSRD, 2026 Requirements — Legal Risk Is Increasing Every Year.
The main sources of GHG emissions at a site
Materials: the heaviest category
In a typical project, inputs represent the most significant source of GHG emissions. Cement is a particularly significant source of emissions: its production generates large amounts of CO₂, both through the decarbonation of limestone and through the energy required to fire the clinker. Steel, aluminum, and other structural metals also contribute significantly to the overall total.
Finishing materials are no exception. Paints, insulation, coatings, and woodwork: each component has its own carbon footprint, which varies depending on its origin, manufacturing process, and transportation distance. In France, studies show that using bio-based materials (wood, hemp, straw) can reduce a building’s carbon footprint by 30 to 50 percent compared to a conventional approach.
⚠️ Warning: With the MACF set to take effect in 2026, industry players that import steel, cement, or aluminum from outside the European Union will be directly affected. Without an ISO 14067-certified PCF for these products, they will be subject to a default tax—often the most punitive on the market.
Transportation and Logistics
The transportation of products, equipment, and crews accounts for the second-largest source of GHG emissions. The distance between supply sites and the field, the mode of transportation used (road, rail, or sea), and logistics optimization have a direct impact on the total.
The machinery itself—excavators, cranes, concrete mixers, and air compressors—runs primarily on diesel and accounts for a significant portion of direct emissions (Scope 1).
On-site energy consumption
Energy consumption includes the power supply for facilities (camps, lighting, tools), any heating required during the drying phase, and all processes. Although this cost category is lower than those for materials and transportation, it remains an accessible area for optimization—particularly for long-term projects, where energy efficiency has a significant cumulative impact.
Waste
The construction industry generates more than 200 million metric tons of waste each year in France. The processing of this waste—including collection, sorting, and transport to recycling or landfill facilities—contributes to the overall total. Effective waste management, including reuse and recycling, significantly reduces this figure while also decreasing the consumption of new materials.
Water and Natural Resources
The use of water on a construction site (for concrete, cleaning, and drilling) and the extraction of natural resources also generate indirect emissions. While this factor carries less weight than materials or transportation, it is nonetheless part of a comprehensive assessment, particularly in life-cycle assessments of new buildings.
What methodology should be used to measure a project's environmental footprint?
Available Standards
There are several methodologies for quantifying GHG emissions in the construction sector. ADEME’s Bilan Carbone® methodology is the most widely used in France. It provides a structured framework for accounting for emissions across all three scopes, with factors tailored to the French context.
The GHG Protocol is the international standard. ISO 14064 provides a framework for reporting at the organizational level, whileISO 14067 focuses on the carbon footprint of products (PCF).
Specifically for the construction sector, the life cycle assessment (LCA) under RE2020 incorporates an indicator into the environmental regulations for new structures. This LCA evaluates all phases: design, construction, operation, renovation, and demolition.
Definition
The PCF (Product Carbon Footprint) tallies GHG emissions across a product’s entire lifecycle: raw materials, manufacturing processes, transportation, and use. Certified under the ISO 14067 standard, it provides data that is transparent, comparable, and defensible when presented to an auditor or a public procurer.
The three scopes applied to operations
The breakdown follows this logic:
- Scope 1 — Direct emissions: vehicle fuels, generators, on-site combustion. This scope is the most visible but often the smallest in terms of volume.
- Scope 2 — Indirect energy-related emissions: purchased electricity to power the site, heating of temporary facilities, etc.
- Scope 3 — Value chain: materials, upstream transportation, subcontracting, waste. This scope accounts for 60 to 90 percent of the total in the construction industry.
It is precisely this Scope 3 data that poses the greatest challenge. The information comes from dozens, or even hundreds, of different suppliers in a variety of formats. To streamline this data collection process on an industrial scale, platforms such as Decarbo’Supply® offer a free portal for suppliers, featuring standardized data entry forms and a cascading enrollment process.
Primary Data vs. Generic Data
The reliability of an assessment depends directly on the quality of the information used. Generic factors (averages by product type) allow for an initial estimate but have high margins of uncertainty, often exceeding 50 percent.
Primary data—actual measurements from suppliers and manufacturing processes—provide much greater accuracy. A PCF structured in accordance with ISO 14067 that incorporates these measurements can achieve a level of uncertainty on the order of 5 percent, making the results truly actionable for decision-making.
Did you know?
An AI-generated PCF can produce a quick estimate, but it remains dependent on the quality of the assumptions. It lacks both the level of traceability and auditability expected in a regulatory compliance context. Companies seeking a label or certification must rely on robust methodological studies.
The Regulatory Framework: What's Changing in 2026
The Climate and Resilience Act: A Turning Point for Public Procurement
August 21, 2026 marks a major milestone for the sector. As of that date, all public procurement contracts must include at least one measurable environmental criterion in the evaluation of bids. Specifically, this criterion is expected to account for between 10 and 30 percent of the final score —enough to tip the scales in awarding a contract.
For companies responding to public tenders, this means that a structured carbon assessment and an auditable carbon footprint are no longer optional. Tools such as Decarbo’Tender® allow companies to integrate scoring directly into the response process, ensuring regulatory compliance.
The MACF: Taxation of Imported Materials
The Border Adjustment Mechanism (BAM) will enter its implementation phase in 2026. Many inputs are directly affected, including steel, cement, aluminum, and hydrogen. In 2028, the scope will be expanded to include processed components—which encompasses a growing number of materials used in construction.
Without proof of the actual CO₂ footprint of your imported inputs, the European Union applies punitive default values. The difference between the flat-rate tax and the tax based on actual data can result in a significant additional cost for a large-scale operation.
RE2020 and Environmental Labels
The RE2020 already sets an emissions threshold for new buildings in France. The BBCA (Low-Carbon Building) label strengthens the decarbonization effort by setting even more ambitious targets. To obtain these certifications, stakeholders must provide detailed LCA studies covering all phases of the project.
CSRD and Mandatory Reporting
The CSRD Directive requires detailed non-financial reporting, including environmental metrics across the entire value chain. This involves collecting and verifying data from every supplier and subcontractor involved in construction projects.
Warning
The changes introduced by the Omnibus Directive do not eliminate the CSRD requirement. The MACF has not been postponed, nor have the 2026 requirements, and clients are not waiting for the regulatory timeline to demand reliable information. The best approach is to plan ahead.
How can you reduce the impact of your operations?
Focusing on materials: the key lever
Since building materials account for the largest source of GHG emissions, they also offer the greatest potential for reduction. Several concrete strategies can be implemented as early as the design phase:
- Prioritize low-carbon alternatives: carbon-neutral concrete, certified wood, recycled steel, and bio-based insulation. Design choices have a decisive impact on the overall result.
- Promoting reuse and recycling: Reusing demolition materials or production scraps reduces both waste and procurement costs.
- Compare suppliers based on environmental criteria: given equivalent quality and price, choose the one with the lowest PCF. This is what Decarbo’Solution® calls Positive Carbon Discrimination® —an objective and auditable selection principle.
- Sourcing locally: Shortening transport distances automatically reduces the logistical carbon footprint.
Optimizing Logistics
Reducing emissions from freight transport requires optimizing logistics: consolidating deliveries, planning shipments to avoid empty runs, and using rail transport when infrastructure permits. The use of electric or hybrid vehicles is beginning to grow, even though the majority of the fleet is still powered by internal combustion engines.
For this component, Decarbo’Transport®incorporates real-world primary data from TK’Blue, enabling the quantification of carbon intensity on a per-operation basis, in accordance with ISO 14083.
Improving Energy Efficiency
On-site optimization involves concrete actions: connecting to the grid rather than using generators, installing LED lighting, reducing equipment operating times, and insulating job sites. The use of renewable energy (solar panels, green power connections) is also an accessible way for construction companies to reduce their carbon footprint.
Managing Waste Responsibly
A well-structured waste management plan—including on-site sorting, recovery pathways identified in advance, and quantified targets— helps reduce this expense while generating savings. The recovery of resources from demolition directly contributes to the construction sector’s ecological transition.
From a Static Assessment to Dynamic Management
BEGES is no longer enough
Most construction companies have already completed their BEGES. This is a useful first step, but it is not enough. The BEGES provides a snapshot at a given point in time. It does not allow companies to manage GHG emissions on a project-by-project basis, to compare suppliers, or to effectively address the environmental component of a request for proposals.
The question is no longer “Have you done your assessment?” but “What are you doing with it?”
To transition from photography to video, it is necessary to establish an operational management framework. This requires tools capable of collecting supplier information, calculating results by project, tracking reduction trends, and generating actionable data.
Structuring the Collection of Scope 3 Data from Suppliers
Scope 3 is at the heart of the challenge. The data is often inconsistent, based on self-reporting, and not comparable across different service providers. To streamline this data collection process, it is essential to implement standardized processes with unified data entry forms and automated follow-up systems.
This is precisely the approach taken by Decarbo’Supply®, which offers a free portal for suppliers and support (Decarbo’Academy, webinars, hotline) to facilitate engagement across the entire supply chain.
Define a Credible Path Forward
Beyond simply measuring their emissions, companies must develop quantified action plans with reduction targets aligned with scientific benchmarks. Decarbo’Target® enables companies to develop these reduction pathways by incorporating both Capex and Opex, in a manner consistent with SBTi requirements and CSRD reporting obligations.
Did you know?
Structuring carbon data takes an average of 12 to 18 months. Starting in 2028 will already be too late to meet public procurement requirements. Construction companies that begin this process now will gain a decisive competitive advantage in the face of regulatory changes.
Conclusion: Take Action Before 2026
The carbon footprint of construction projects is no longer a theoretical exercise limited to CSR reports. It has become a strategic tool that determines market access, cost control, and the long-term competitiveness of construction companies.
The deadlines are clear: regulatory requirements in August 2026, MACF in the structuring phase, and CSRD mandating transparency. Companies that are structuring their approach now—from emissions measurement to low-carbon trajectories, including supplier engagement—are turning regulatory constraints into economic advantages.
Decarbo’Solution® supports players in the construction industry through this transition with a comprehensive suite of solutions: from GHG assessments (Decarbo’Inventory®) to supplier engagement (Decarbo’Supply®), from scoring in requests for proposals (Decarbo’Tender®) to managing the decarbonization pathway (Decarbo’Target®).
Don't just go through the transition. Take charge of it.