Standardization Guidelines
Learn how Tracenable standardizes GHG emissions data by mapping disclosures to GHG Protocol scopes and sources, clarifying Scope 2 methods, and ensuring comparability.
Why Standardization Matters
Corporate Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions disclosures vary widely. Some companies publish only total emissions, others break data down by detailed sources, and many use inconsistent or ambiguous terminology.
Without harmonization, these differences make it difficult to:
Compare emissions across companies and industries.
Aggregate data for portfolio- or sector-level analysis.
Align corporate disclosures with GHG Protocol, CSRD (ESRS E1) or voluntary frameworks (GRI, CDP, TCFD).
Tracenable’ addresses this by applying clear standardization rules, ensuring all Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions data fits into a single, comparable structure while retaining traceability to the original company report.
Tracenable's Standardization Guidelines
Guideline 1: Normalize Units to Metric Tonnes of CO₂e
Emissions may appear in units such as kg CO₂e, g CO₂e, or short tons. All are converted to metric tonnes of CO₂e (tCO₂e) following GHG Protocol standards.
Example: A value of 100,000 short tons CO₂e converts to 90,718.5 tCO₂e (1 short ton = 0.907185 metric tonnes).
This guarantees that emissions are expressed on a unified global scale.
Guideline 2: Map Reported Data to GHG Protocol-Defined Scopes and Sources
Companies don’t always follow standard language when reporting emissions. For example:
A disclosure may use vague terms like “direct” (Scope 1) or “indirect" (Scope 2 or 3).
Some combine categories (e.g., “Scope 1+2”) instead of reporting them separately.
Others list raw emission sources like “vehicle fleet” or “air travel” without specifying the scope.
Tracenable resolves this by mapping all reported values to the GHG Protocol’s standardized framework of scopes and source categories:
Scopes: All emissions are classified into Scope 1 (direct), Scope 2 (indirect energy), or Scope 3 (value chain). Combined totals are retained only when separate scope-level data is not disclosed.
Sources: Within each scope, company terms are mapped to the correct standard categories. For example:
“Natural gas boilers” → Scope 1 - Stationary Combustion.
“Vehicle fleet” → Scope 1 - Mobile Combustion.
“Purchased power” → Scope 2 - Electricity.
“Business travel by air and rail” → Scope 3 - Business Travel (Category 6)
This ensures consistency across disclosures and enables reliable apples-to-apples comparisons.
When reported values cannot be confidently mapped to a standard category due to limited detail or ambiguous terminology, Tracenable assigns them to a dedicated “Unmapped” category within each Scope. This approach ensures no information is discarded, keeps the dataset complete, and highlights where reporting gaps or data quality issues may affect comparability.
Looking for detailed mapping guides?
Tracenable maintains internal mapping references for Scope 1, 2, and 3 categories. These guides reconcile “as reported” terminology with standardized definitions, based on the GHG Protocol and related frameworks. While not published publicly, they can be shared privately upon request.
Guideline 3: Map Reported Methods to Market-Based or Location-Based
Scope 2 and some categories of Scope 3 emissions may be reported with unclear or inconsistent terminology, or without a method specified. For instance:
A disclosure might reference “grid average factors” → mapped to location-based.
Another may provide values “before RECs” and “after RECs” → mapped to location-based vs. market-based.
No method specified at all.
Tracenable standardizes all such cases into the three recognized categories — location-based, market-based, or not specified — and preserves both values when available. This ensures clarity, avoids double counting, and allows for transparent comparison across companies and years.
Takeaway:
Tracenable’s standardization rules ensure that GHG emissions data is:
Consistent – all disclosures are mapped to GHG Protocol scopes and source categories.
Comparable – variations in terminology and reporting styles are harmonized into a single structure.
Transparent – original company terms and methods remain traceable, even when standardized.
Reliable – Scope 2 methods are clearly distinguished (location-based vs. market-based), avoiding double counting.
Complete – no information is lost, even when company disclosures cannot be fully standardized.