Has a customer already sent you a spreadsheet asking for the carbon footprint of your components? If so, you are not the only one. And if it hasn't landed yet, it is only a matter of time.
In the automotive industry this is no longer a conversation about sustainability. It is a conversation about whether you stay in the business or not. Vehicle manufacturers (the OEMs) no longer measure only their own emissions: more and more of them are building the product carbon footprint into supplier approval, contract renewal and supplier selection. Do you know exactly what they are asking for, and why?
Why the automotive sector is leading the demands
Vehicle manufacturers have a structural problem: most of their emissions do not sit in their own plants but in their value chain. Upstream, in the components and materials they buy from their suppliers; downstream, in the use of the vehicle over its lifetime. In other words, in Scope 3. An OEM that wants to cut its real footprint has no choice but to look towards its supply chain.
The result is a cascade effect that is already under way. Groups such as Volkswagen, Stellantis, BMW and Renault are incorporating the product carbon footprint as a formal variable in their supplier evaluation and renewal processes. What used to be a voluntary questionnaire or a one-off request is becoming a requirement to renew a contract or enter a tender.
What OEMs mean by "product carbon footprint"
When a manufacturer asks you for this figure, they mean the PCF (product carbon footprint): the greenhouse-gas emissions associated with the life cycle of your component, expressed in kg of CO₂ equivalent per unit produced.
The most common scope in early requests is what is known as cradle to gate: from raw-material extraction until the component leaves your plant. The reference methodology is usually ISO 14067 or the GHG Protocol Product Standard. Some customers also ask for the calculation to include transport to their facilities, or for it to be verified by a third party.
The problem is that when the request arrives, it is rarely well explained. Sometimes it is a spreadsheet with unclear columns. Other times it is a reference to a regulation you do not know. And there is almost always a tight deadline.
Catena-X and PACT: towards data that is comparable across the whole chain
To avoid every manufacturer asking for the figure in its own way, the sector has begun to standardise how the PCF is calculated and exchanged. Two references are setting the direction:
- Catena-X: the automotive sector's data network has published its PCF Rulebook, a set of common rules for calculating and exchanging the product carbon footprint across the entire automotive value chain.
- WBCSD PACT (Partnership for Carbon Transparency): its Pathfinder Framework defines how to calculate and share primary PCF data between companies. The Catena-X rulebook is aligned with this framework.
For a supplier, this has a clear reading: the figure you are asked for is converging on a common standard, based on real data from your production rather than sector averages. The sooner you get your primary data in order, the better prepared you will be when the format becomes the norm.
Where suppliers get stuck
This is where most companies get bogged down.
The data exists, but it is scattered: energy consumption in one system, material purchases in another, transport data in a spreadsheet nobody updates. Consolidating it all for a single calculation is already a considerable effort. But what really hits day-to-day operations is having to repeat it constantly because another customer asks for it, in a different format and for a different product.
The second problem is traceability. The OEM does not just want the emissions figure, it wants to know where it comes from. A calculation without documented sources and applied emission factors will not pass an audit and creates distrust with the customer.
The upshot is that many suppliers end up responding late, with weak data, or simply cannot respond at all.
If this situation sounds familiar, we have prepared a specific guide for industrial suppliers that explains how to get out of this deadlock: what your customer is really asking for, which data you need and how to build a first defensible calculation without grinding your operations to a halt.
The implications are directly commercial. Suppliers that cannot evidence the footprint of their products face delays in approval processes, difficulties renewing contracts and lost tenders against competitors that do have the figure. If you cannot provide it, another supplier will.
Calculating the footprint of your components with real, traceable data in line with ISO 14067 stops being a problem when the calculation is automated: that is how Manglai's product footprint solution works.
