Buildings account for about 40% of global CO2 emissions, so it’s no wonder why so much focus goes toward green building systems and reduced emissions from corporate structures. Reducing this structural carbon footprint can help counter climate change and push us toward the goals outlined in the Paris Agreement and other climate action pacts.
To help you plan and work toward lowering emissions from corporate buildings, you can look to a GHG emissions reduction audit checklist for building owners. These audit checklists and GHG inventory management can all help you reach your carbon emissions goals.
Continue reading for more about these audits and the actions you can take to reduce your building’s emissions.
How Do You Reduce GHG in Buildings?
Reducing greenhouse gas emissions (GHG emissions) in buildings starts when construction begins and continues throughout the building’s lifespan. Let’s review how to reduce emissions in both stages to minimize a building’s environmental impact.
GHG Emissions Reduction Audit Checklist for Building Owners During Construction
Starting on the right foot regarding GHG emissions reductions for building owners begins at the construction phase. Of course, none of this will apply if we’re talking about an existing building. However, if you’re constructing a new building, these tips can help lower the carbon footprint of erecting a new building.
Reuse Old Buildings
Instead of commissioning a new building, you can reduce emissions by reusing an old building. In fact, by doing this, you can save 50% to 75% of the embodied carbon emissions — the emissions associated with the materials and construction process — relative to new construction.
So, when considering a new building, think to yourself, “Is there an existing building we can renovate to fit our needs?” If so, you can reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by rehabilitating the old building. Plus, you can use some of the character in older commercial buildings to your advantage in the design phase.
Remember, that when reusing older buildings, you’ll likely have some extra work for efficiency improvements, but the emissions savings will easily offset that need.
Use Low-Carbon Concrete
Concrete production isn’t known for its GHG emissions, but its sheer weight and the amount that goes into a new building make it the most significant embodied carbon source in many projects. In fact, cement accounts for a whopping 7% of all global emissions and 50% to 85% of the embodied carbon in a building project.
You can reduce your building’s carbon footprint by opting for lower-emission concrete, such as those with fly ash, slag, or calcined clays. You can even opt for lower-strength concrete where it makes sense.
Limit Carbon-Heavy Materials
Materials with big carbon footprints, such as metals, plastic, and foam, can be a part of the construction process but seek low-carbon alternatives where possible to help with the decarbonization of your project.
So, consider a wooden instead of a steel structure to reach your building’s GMG emissions reduction goals. Or maybe opt for wooden siding instead of vinyl.
Reuse Materials
During the construction or renovation process, don’t immediately scrap all the old materials. Many of those materials, such as metal, bricks, concrete, and wood, are reusable. And each item you reuse directly reduces your project’s emission factors. Plus, it’s a more cost-effective way to build.
Focus on Recycled Materials
Recycled materials can help greatly lower the GHG emissions in your building or renovation project. For example, new steel can have five times the carbon footprint of recycled steel. On top of lowering your carbon footprint, recycled materials are often less expensive than new materials.
Minimize Finished Materials
Finishings like vinyl flooring or carpeting add to the carbon footprint of your project. Instead of going with these finishings, choose materials that don’t need finishings, such as polished concrete for the floors.
GHG Emissions Reduction Audit Checklist for Building Owners After Construction
After construction, you are still responsible for keeping the ongoing building emissions as low as possible, whether through improved energy efficiency, reduced waste, or improved sustainability. Let’s review some action plans building owners can take to ensure they improve their energy conservation and the building’s ongoing GMG emissions remain low.
Update Heating and Cooling
Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) make up 40% to 60% of all building carbon emissions, so this area is ripe for cutting. First, ensure you have an efficient system installed, such as some of the newer passive heating and cooling setups.
It’s also a good idea to have a programmable system. You can program it to a warmer setting during off-hours and a comfortable setting during occupancy hours.
Also, most buildings have outdoor air ventilation to keep the inside fresh, but the issue is this system runs constantly and always needs to be heated or cooled. You can counter this by installing air-quality sensors that detect when ventilation is necessary and activate this system only when needed.
This will help reduce your energy consumption, lower overall energy costs, and shrink your building’s footprint.
Perform Lighting Upgrades
Up to 40% of a commercial building’s energy consumption goes toward lighting, making this another prime target for reducing building emissions and adding in some cost savings.
Some ways to immediately lower the carbon footprint of your lighting is to install smart lights that only turn on when an area is in use and to replace all inefficient incandescent lights with more eco-friendly LED lighting. You can also add some daylighting to certain areas of the building, taking advantage of the greenest of all lights — the sun.
Install Renewable Energy
Offset some or all of your buildings’ energy use by installing renewable energy, such as solar panels. These energy efficiency measures may have significant upfront expenses, but federal and local government incentives and overall electricity savings can help make up for this cost.
By installing green appliances, you can lower energy consumption and increase energy savings. For example, you can replace old and inefficient boilers and water heaters with more efficient solar water heaters to lower electricity or natural gas usage when generating hot water. You can even swap old hard-wired ventilation fans with solar-powered ones to improve energy performance.
Reduce Water Waste
Sustainable water use can also go a long way in reducing your environmental impact and cutting operational costs. Some ways to help lower water use and waste include retrofitting low-flow water fixtures, reclaiming water systems for non-potable water recycling, and collecting rainwater for use in on-site irrigation and decorative water features.
How Do You Conduct a GHG Inventory?
First, what is a greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory? According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), it is “a list of emission sources and the associated emissions quantified using standardized methods.”
The EPA outlines the GHG inventory development process in four steps: scope and plan, collect and quantify data, create a GHG inventory management plan, and set targets, track, and report. Let’s review these four steps in more detail.
Step 1: Scope and Plan
To conduct a GHG inventory, you start by reviewing the organization’s GHG accounting methods and how it reports on these emissions. The organization and its stakeholders must then determine the organization’s emissions boundaries, select a base year to start from, and consider bringing in a third party to verify the improvements.
Step 2: Collect and Quantify Data
In the second step, you’ll identify all the GHG data required and the preferred data-collection methods. Then, you’ll develop procedures, tools, and guidance that adhere to these requirements. After that, gather and review all the facility data, such as electricity and natural gas consumption from the baseline year you chose, and use estimation to fill in any data gaps. From there, you can calculate your emissions.
Step 3: Create a GHG Inventory Management Plan
Next, you‘ll create formal data collection procedures and document processes in the inventory management plan. This will include all institutional, managerial, and technical arrangements made for data collection, inventory preparation, and implementation of steps to manage inventory quality.
This management system ensures a systematic process is in place to help prevent and correct errors and identify where investments net the greatest improvements in inventory quality. However, this system’s main focus is to ensure the credibility of the organization’s GHG inventory data using five key GHG accounting principles, which we’ll cover later.
Overall, your inventory management plan will have seven key steps:
- Create an inventory quality team.
- Create a quality management plan.
- Perform generic quality tests.
- Perform source-specific quality tests.
- Review final inventory estimates and reports.
- Institutionalize formal feedback loops.
- Report, document, and archive data.
Step 4: Set Targets, Track, and Report
With the process in place, it’s now time to set your building-emissions-reduction targets relative to the base year you selected and, if you like, bring in a third party to verify your targets are attainable and helpful. You’ll then report all data as needed, publish a public GHG target report, and track your progress toward effective energy management and emissions reductions.
What Is the Standard for GHG Accounting?
Greenhouse gas emissions accounting and reporting must be based on five key principles. The principles are as follows:
- Relevance: The GHG inventory must appropriately reflect the company’s GHG emissions and serve internal and external users’ decision-making needs.
- Completeness: The organization must account for and report all sources of GHG emissions and activities within the chosen boundaries. It must also disclose and justify any GHG emissions it excluded.
- Consistency: An organization’s methodologies must remain consistent to allow accurate and meaningful GHG emission comparisons.
- Transparency: Address all relevant issues factually and coherently using a clear audit trail. If relevant assumptions are used, the organization must disclose them and make appropriate references.
- Accuracy: Ensure the GHG emissions quantification is neither over nor under the actual emissions and that uncertainties are reduced as much as possible. The organization must also ensure sufficient accuracy so users can decide based on the reported information’s integrity.
How Do You Measure GHG Emissions in a Building?
Emissions from a building can come in all three scopes: scope one, scope two, and scope three. When calculating GHG emissions from a building, you must consider all three scopes, which can make it tricky.
Scope one emissions are relatively simple to track, as these are direct GHG emissions, such as burning fossil fuels. To calculate GHG emissions in this scope, review resource consumption on utility bills, and use a calculator to determine the GHG emissions that amount of consumption made.
Scope two emissions are indirect GHG emissions that stem from the building’s energy usage from the electrical grid. So, if your company’s electricity comes from a coal-fired plant, this would include your building’s share of that plant’s emissions based on your energy consumption.
You can estimate your scope two emissions using a GHG emissions calculator and the building information, such as square feet. Keep in mind, getting a precise number is generally not possible because many power grids include multiple energy sources, including coal, natural gas, nuclear, and solar.
Finally, scope three emissions include GHG emissions from all other sources, including the supply chain and other business operations that are not within the organization’s control. In terms of a building, this can include all embodied carbon too.
Scope three emissions are difficult to track and are generally not in the organization’s control, for this reason, organizations normally aren’t required to report on them. However, monitoring, understanding, and reducing scope three emissions can help you create a green building.
Help Fight Global Warming by Auditing and Reducing Your Building’s GHG Emissions
Global warming and climate change are critical, and it’s time for everyone to chip in and do their part. This includes building owners reducing their buildings’ carbon footprints. Fortunately, GHG emissions reduction audit checklists for building owners can help in this process by giving you firm steps to follow and the data you need to successfully reduce your structural carbon footprint.
If you’re not yet ready to take on the task of reducing building emissions or already have and want to further decrease your corporate carbon footprint, we have options for you at Terrapass. Check out our voluntary carbon credits, and see how they can help offset any remaining corporate emissions, helping you attain or get closer to being a net-zero carbon emitter.
Brought to you by terrapass.com
Images per Copyright free
The post GHG Emissions Reduction Audit Checklist for Building Owners appeared first on Terrapass.
Nature-based carbon investments deserve consideration when they address a specific business dependency and produce outcomes you can measure. Imagine Moonbucks, a global coffee roaster planning next season’s espresso blend. It is considering natural Grade 4 coffee from Jimma, in southwestern Oromia, Ethiopia. Its sourcing decisions affect the roasting schedule and the cash tied up in coffee purchases. Moonbucks needs to understand which measures could protect that supply, what they would cost and how it would judge the results.
1. Define the sourcing problem before choosing a project
Moonbucks needs a dependable component for its espresso blend. Its procurement team wants continuity of volume and an agreed cup profile. Replacing a shipment at short notice could require new sample approval and changes to the blend, and given the schedules for cultivation, processing, and freight delivery, is practically impossible. Moonbucks needs to get this right, and its initial concern is inconsistent deliveries. It commissions an assessment of the supplying farms and post-harvest chain. The questions cover land condition, harvest availability and whether drying or storage problems are affecting saleable lots.
This distinction changes the investment brief. A tree-planting proposal cannot be assumed to fix drying problems. Better storage cannot restore eroded land. The team must establish which problem exists before selecting the response.
CCC’s guide to finding nature-based solutions in your supply chain explains where to look. Here, the next task is to turn a broad concern into a testable proposal.
2. Develop nature-based carbon investments around the actual supply chain
The assessment would trace Moonbucks’ purchases back through the exporter and supplying producer groups. Which farms supply the contracted lots? Who controls land-management decisions? How long does the buyer expect to maintain the purchasing relationship?
Furthermore, Jimma natural Grade 4 cannot be treated as interchangeable with every Ethiopian coffee. Moonbucks would need to test any substitute against its own blend and quality requirements.
Suppose Moonbucks’ assessment identifies an opportunity to maintain shade trees and restore vegetation along exposed streambanks. The IPCC describes agroforestry as a way to store carbon in vegetation and soil, with potential benefits for erosion control and water quality.1 Moonbucks would need local advice on species, growing conditions and maintenance before deciding how these measures fit its sourcing plan.
The proposal now has a defined sourcing connection and a candidate intervention. The next steps are to test its effect on production, assess carbon eligibility and build the financial case.
3. Compare the proposal with other ways to protect supply
WBCSD’s Nature-based Solutions Blueprint recommends comparing nature-based options with other responses across their benefits and costs.2 For Moonbucks, that means evaluating the landscape proposal alongside drying improvements, storage controls and alternative sourcing arrangements.
The product’s natural-process designation matters. Moonbucks should examine the drying and dry-milling chain alongside land conditions. Its team would check storage practices, contamination risks and incoming-lot quality to see whether problems arise before or after the coffee leaves the farms.
The revised proposal might combine land stewardship with separate post-harvest controls. Each component needs its own purpose and budget. A sustainability label should not obscure which activity is expected to solve which problem.
The project develops as the evidence improves. Its scope should follow the diagnosis rather than preserve the first idea unchanged.
4. Establish what the carbon outcome could count toward
Moonbucks’ sustainability team now tests the proposed carbon case separately from the sourcing case. Is the objective a measurable change in Moonbucks’ value-chain emissions, verified credits for separate voluntary use, or distinct outcomes under carefully defined arrangements?
Scope 3 covers value-chain emissions. A purchasing relationship alone does not prove that a farm intervention can be included in Moonbucks’ inventory. The team needs an applicable accounting method, defensible boundaries and evidence supporting attribution.
SBTi’s FLAG Guidance (forest, land and agriculture), version 1.2, says purchased credits used as offsets cannot meet near-term FLAG or energy and industry targets. Eligible land-based removals are subject to accounting requirements.3 Moonbucks needs to test its proposal against those rules before including an outcome in its targets.
For Moonbucks’ Jimma proposal, maintaining existing trees and establishing new vegetation could involve different carbon questions. Specialists must examine the baseline and additionality, meaning what changes because the project proceeds. They must also assess measurement and the risk that stored carbon is lost. CCC’s MRV and additionality article introduces those tests.
Until that work is complete, Moonbucks should not budget an assumed Scope 3 reduction or credit-sale receipt. Direct emissions reductions remain the priority.
5. Build a financial case that survives weaker assumptions
Moonbucks’ finance team would now build a multi-year budget. UNEP’s State of Finance for Nature 2023 compares current finance with the investment needed to meet climate, biodiversity and land-restoration goals.4 The company would cost its proposed activities, farmer participation and ongoing monitoring. Verification, where required, is a separate expense. Maintenance and responsibility for replacing failed plantings must remain visible after the initial establishment budget ends.
Operational benefits need equally careful treatment. If fewer rejected lots reduce emergency purchasing, count that saving once. Do not add “supply resilience” as another financial benefit when it represents the same avoided cost.
Moonbucks should compare a base case with slower benefits, higher implementation costs and no carbon revenue. It should also distinguish production outcomes from quality and shipment outcomes. A single good harvest would not prove that the landscape intervention caused better delivery performance.
A project can remain worth funding even when its carbon case needs more work. That decision must rest on the operational evidence and the company’s objectives, without unsupported environmental claims.
6. Fund a pilot with a clear expansion decision
Moonbucks’ first approval would fund a bounded pilot, rather than commit the entire sourcing program. Before spending, Moonbucks would agree on participating farms, responsibilities and the evidence needed at review.
Its scorecard could track farmer participation, implementation costs and plant survival, alongside accepted coffee volumes and lot-quality results. Carbon measurements would follow the selected method. Farm-level traceability must connect the intervention to the actual sourcing relationship.
Suppose Moonbucks’ review later finds that storage changes explain most quality improvements, while the land measures need longer observation. Those findings would shape the next decision: expand the proven component, adjust the landscape work or pause further spending. They would not justify crediting all improvements to tree planting.
This gives nature-based carbon investments a practical place in a multi-year strategy. Funding increases as the evidence supports it, and the project can change direction before a larger commitment.
Discuss a sourcing opportunity with CCC
Carbon Credit Capital’s nature-based supply-chain investment service uses its Dual-Value Model to examine supply-chain economics alongside potential sustainability outcomes.
Schedule a consultation to discuss your sourcing exposure and the questions to resolve before allocating capital.
Sources
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change, Chapter 7, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Uses, section 7.4.3.3 (Agroforestry).
- World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), Nature-based Solutions Blueprint, 5 June 2024.
- Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi), Forest, Land and Agriculture Science-Based Target-Setting Guidance, version 1.2, March 2026, section 3.1.4, pp. 37–38.
- United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), State of Finance for Nature 2023, 2023.
A plastic credit funds the collection of plastic waste in places where no formal system exists to collect it. Each credit represents a measured, independently audited quantity of plastic taken out of the environment or returned to use, tracked on a public registry.
