Assessing the Quality of Your Bilan Carbone®
Against the backdrop of an ongoing ecological and energy transition, reducing their environmental and climate impact has become a strategic priority for companies. In particular, they must build resilience in the face of global warming and its consequences for the environment and energy. Many, for example, are setting carbon neutrality targets for 2030 or 2050, following the lead of France and many other countries.
To achieve carbon neutrality, organizations must reduce their carbon footprint, which means first measuring their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. A GHG inventory, or Bilan Carbone®, allows organizations to systematically assess these emissions over the course of a year. Once the main sources have been identified, the company can then implement an effective and appropriate transition plan.
Several questions arise when conducting a carbon assessment, such as its cost, its quality, or the financial assistance available for carbon assessments. Assessments can be completed in 15 minutes using online simulators, but their quality cannot compare to that of an assessment conducted with the guidance of an expert. There is also a wide variety of online carbon footprint assessment platforms available for businesses and individuals, and the quality of the resulting assessment may vary depending on the platform chosen.
In this article, we will examine the criteria to consider when evaluating the quality of your carbon footprint assessment, as well as how to choose a platform for conducting your carbon footprint assessment.
1. The quality criteria for a Bilan Carbone®.
1.2. Quality of the Collected Data
2. How do you choose a platform?
The quality criteria for a Bilan Carbone®.
☁️Emission factors used
One of the key criteria for a high-quality Bilan Carbone® assessment is the use of physical, rather than monetary, factors.
First, let’s revisit the concept of an emission factor. When conducting a Bilan Carbone® assessment, the calculation is based on the following formula:
Activity data × Emissions factor
The data could include, for example, electricity consumption in kWh, fuel consumption while traveling in liters, or the amount in euros spent on a particular company purchase. The unit of measurement depends on the category being analyzed.
This data is then multiplied by an emission factor—that is, a coefficient that converts the data into actual greenhouse gas emissions. For example, according to the Empreinte database, the emission factor for a diesel-powered car manufactured in France in 2024 is 0.227 kg CO2-eq/km. Thus, if this car travels 100 km, it will emit 0.227 × 100 = 22.7 kg CO2-eq.
It is a physical factor. It is used to calculate the desired amount of greenhouse gas emissions based on the quantity of a given good.
It should be distinguished from a monetary factor, which calculates the desired amount of GHG emissions based on the price of the good in question. The amount of emissions is then expressed in kgCO2/k€, rather than per unit. This is a significant methodological difference, and one that affects the quality of the assessment.
Monetary factors are less precise than physical factors and inherently involve a high degree of uncertainty, which varies in extent depending on the category of purchases under consideration. There is no rigorous method for determining the uncertainty associated with these factors.
These emission factors can be used when the physical data cannot be obtained, and for certain categories of emissions (such as purchases of services).
Depending on the emission factors used, the quality of the work produced will therefore vary.
✅Quality of the collected data
Another criterion for evaluating the quality of a Bilan Carbone® is the quality of the data collected.
As discussed earlier, greenhouse gas emissions are calculated by multiplying the data by the corresponding emission factor. Depending on the quality of this data, the result is more or less accurate.
ADEME has four types of data:
- Primary data: observed data extracted from information systems.
- Secondary data: generic or average, derived from published sources.
- Extrapolated data: primary or secondary data related to a similar activity that has been adapted or customized for a new situation.
- Proxy data: primary or secondary data related to a similar activity that can be used in place of representative data. The data is not adapted.
The more verifiable and accurate the data is , the more accurate, usable, and high-quality the carbon footprint calculation itself will be.
❓Uncertainty
The uncertainty of a greenhouse gas emissions inventory refers to the possible difference between the value assigned to the quantified quantity and the actual value. It is expressed either as a fixed value (5%, 15%, 30%, etc.) or as a range (for example, between 10% and 15% uncertainty) for a given confidence level. If the confidence level is 95%, then there is a 95% probability that the correct value lies within the given interval.
Uncertainty can arise in both terms of the formula mentioned earlier: the data and the selected emission factors.
As explained above, the higher the quality of the data , the lower its uncertainty will be.
With regard to emission factors, the existing uncertainties are related to the determination of the factor (calculation or measurement method), whether determined directly (by a supplier, for example) or using published references (such as Base Empreinte).
By combining these two uncertainties in the calculation, we obtain the overall uncertainty of the balance. The lower it is, the more accurate and reliable the result will be, and vice versa.
📃Compliance
The final criterion for assessing the quality of a balance sheet is its compliance with current methods.
There are several:
- The GHG Protocol, which defines the three scopes.
- ISO 14064-1:2018, which defines these scopes in six categories.
- The BEGES regulatory method (French territory only).
- The ADEME’sBilan Carbone® method , promoted by the ABC (France only).
Depending on the needs of the company in question, different methods may be chosen. For example, in France, companies with more than 500 employees are required to prepare their BEGES using the regulatory method every four years. Other methods are more optional. International companies often choose the GHG Protocol or ISO 14061-1 to comply with international standards.
In any case, it is important to prepare your financial statement in full compliance with one of these recognized methods—which have been tested and approved by experts—to ensure its quality.
How do you choose a platform?
We have defined the criteria for assessing the quality of your greenhouse gas emissions balance. Now, how do you choose the right platform to produce a quality balance sheet?
📑Choose a compliant platform
Choosing a platform that complies with the methods discussed below (GHG Protocol, ISO 14064-1:2018, etc.) is essential for a high-quality assessment.
For example, a company may choose based on the tool’s listings and the number of standards it complies with, depending on its needs.
A company that needs the Bilan Carbone® method will therefore choose a platform listed by the ABC, while a company that needs an international method will choose a platform that complies with the GHG Protocol or ISO 14064-1:2018.
At Decarbo’Solution®, in addition to complying with all the methods mentioned above, we also conduct GHG inventory audits in accordance with ISO 14064-3:2019, which specifies the requirements and guidelines for the verification and validation of greenhouse gas emissions reports.
🔎Choose a specific platform
We have seen how important the quality of the collected data and the types of factors used are. One criterion for choosing a platform may be its level of accuracy: how far the tool allows you to go in data collection, and which emission factors it allows you to use.
For example, does the tool use physical or monetary factors? Which databases does it provide access to? Does it allow for the use of emission factors obtained directly from suppliers, thereby reducing uncertainty and increasing the accuracy of the inventory? Does it allow for the accurate calculation ofthe carbon footprint of purchasedproducts and services, based on a life cycle assessment, for example?
When it comes to data collection, is there any guidance provided, or are questionnaires distributed for certain types of data being collected?
Ultimately, the question is not only how accurate the platform is, but also how collaborative it is. The more collaborative it is—and the more it facilitates dialogue between a client and its suppliers, as well as their internal teams—the more accurate and high-quality the data and emission factors used will be.
Finally, it should be noted that the quality of the BilanCarbone® assessment affects the quality of the company’s communication. A false or inaccurate BEGES assessment can lead the company to communicate inaccurately or even engage in misleading advertising. This is known as “greenwashing.”
Assessing the quality of your Bilan Carbone® and choosing a platform that enables you to generate a high-quality assessment is essential for accurately evaluating your impact and carbon footprint, and thus initiating a meaningful and effective ecological transition to reduce your impact on the environment and climate. This approach also aligns very well with a corporate social responsibility (CSR) strategy.
To learn more, see how the price of carbon offsets is calculated?