What a pilot actually produces.
Three shapes drawn from the sectors that ask most often. They are illustrative outlines on representative figures, not customer case studies: no organisation is described, and no result is claimed on anyone’s behalf.
Every pilot answers the same question in a different vocabulary: where does this number come from, and would it survive being asked? What changes between sectors is which records already exist, which figures carry the most weight with whoever is asking, and how much of the answer is currently an estimate. Each shape below follows the same five steps — starting point, records available, evidence built, what the team holds at the end, and where it goes next.
A 450-bed multi-speciality hospital.
Starting point
Energy and fuel figures are assembled each quarter from bills and a spreadsheet kept by the facilities engineer. The board pack carries a carbon number nobody can source, and the group’s reporting team has started asking for evidence behind attributes it previously took on trust. Biomedical waste is well documented for the regulator and not connected to anything else.
Where it goes next
The second and third hospitals in the group run the same shape on the same parameters, so a group figure becomes an addition rather than a new exercise. Water and medical-gas allocation are the usual second wave.
| Step | What it looks like |
|---|---|
| Records available | HT meter exports; DG fuel logs and run hours; LPG and medical-gas invoices; water bills and borewell readings; biomedical waste manifests under the authorised handler. |
| Evidence built | Scope 1 from fuel logs and factors, Scope 2 from HT meter readings and the grid factor — each cross-checked against the utility invoice and the site’s own trailing 12 months. Waste tied to manifests per collection. |
| Held at the end | One facility’s energy, water and waste figures, each with its record, its reviewer and its cross-check; a board summary with confidence beside every number; a gap list naming what is still estimated — typically LPG allocation across kitchen and clinical use. |
| Typical honest weakness | Estimated Sub-metering between clinical blocks rarely exists, so block-level intensity stays an allocation and is labelled as one. |
A single plant with three production lines.
Starting point
Two large customers have begun asking for product-level footprints with evidence, and one has attached it to a purchase condition. A corporate inventory exists and is reasonable, but it cannot be broken down per line or per product family, and the supplier data behind purchased materials is a set of emailed declarations in a shared folder.
Where it goes next
Outreach to the remaining suppliers on the same evidence request, or a second product family. Sites preparing for Digital Product Passport requirements usually extend here first.
| Step | What it looks like |
|---|---|
| Records available | Energy meters per line; furnace and boiler fuel logs; weighbridge records; purchased-material invoices from the ERP; scrap and recycling manifests; supplier declarations for the top ten materials. |
| Evidence built | Scope 1 and Scope 2 per line rather than per site; Scope 3 category 1 built from supplier declarations with the document attached to the figure; recycled content and scrap tied to weighbridge tickets. |
| Held at the end | A per-line intensity figure that can be handed to a customer with its evidence rather than asserted in an email; passport-ready records for one product family; a supplier list ranked by how much of its evidence is documented rather than declared. |
| Typical honest weakness | Reported Upstream figures rest on what suppliers send. Where a declaration carries no document, the figure is classed reported, not measured, and the ranking says so. |
Three commercial buildings under one owner.
Starting point
The buildings hold a green-building rating earned largely on design, and a lender has begun asking for annual operating performance instead. Landlord and tenant consumption are mixed in the reporting; anomalies surface at year end, when nothing can be done about them.
Where it goes next
The rest of the portfolio on the same shape, and the same evidence-linked figures fed into the rating submission and the lender’s annual pack rather than prepared twice.
| Step | What it looks like |
|---|---|
| Records available | BMS exports; landlord and tenant electricity meters; DG logs; water meters; waste contractor tickets; occupancy or leased-area data. |
| Evidence built | The landlord and tenant split made explicit; energy intensity per square foot normalised for occupancy; BMS readings cross-checked against the utility invoice; anomalies flagged monthly against each building’s own history. |
| Held at the end | An evidence-linked performance view per building, a figure the lender can check against its own covenant, and anomalies visible in the month they occur rather than in the following July. |
| Typical honest weakness | Estimated Tenant-side consumption is often unmetered; where it is, the split is an allocation and every figure derived from it inherits that label. |
Why these are shapes and not case studies
A case study describes a real organisation and claims a result. These do not: they are composites of the questions and record types we meet in each sector, written so a team can recognise its own situation and judge whether the exercise is worth twelve weeks. When customers are willing to be named and their outcomes can be evidenced to the standard we ask of every other figure on this site, case studies will appear here and will say so.
Common questions
Can we start with something smaller than a whole facility?
Yes, and it is often the better first step: one parameter with a genuinely contested number — Scope 2, or waste under an authorised handler — is enough to show whether the evidence approach changes anything for you.
Our sector is not one of these three. Does the shape change?
The steps do not; the records do. Data centres, pharmaceutical plants, petrochemicals, power and waste operators each have their own record types, and the industry pages set out the figures that carry weight in each.
Do you need our historical data to be clean first?
No, and waiting for it is the most common way a programme stalls. Records come in as they are; what is weak gets classed as estimated or flagged, and the gap list is one of the more useful things a pilot produces.
Representative outlines on synthetic figures. EcoVeraZ is not an ESG rating agency and does not issue assurance opinions.
See the evidence behind your numbers.
A 30-minute walkthrough on your own data, with your own questions.