What Sets ISCC CFC Apart: Certifying Product Carbon Footprints with Clarity and Credibility
As interest in Product Carbon Footprints (PCFs) increases within climate strategies, regulations, and procurement, the demand for reliable and consistent data is rising. Although standards like ISO 14067, the GHG Protocol, and Together for Sustainability (TfS) provide important methodological frameworks, they allow for interpretation differences, which can hinder cross-company comparisons and consistent verification.
Our new scheme, ISCC Carbon Footprint Certification (ISCC CFC), addresses this gap. It builds on existing standards, transforming them into a standalone certifiable, sector-agnostic system with clear rules, auditability, and transparency. Let’s have a closer look at the scheme’s technical requirements.
Standardising What Matters Most: Our Calculation Principles and Documentation Requirements
A major challenge with PCF data today is the variation in methodological choices: different companies, or even different products within the same company, may employ different system boundaries, emission factors, allocation methods, or data sources – despite all following the same ISO standard.
ISCC CFC applies core ISO principles – but goes further by introducing additional guidance, restrictions, and documentation rules.
ISO-Aligned Elements Within ISCC CFC
- Clear System Boundaries: System boundaries must be explicitly defined as either “cradle-to-gate” or “cradle-to-grave,” depending on the product and its intended use. This guarantees a consistent reference point for all calculations and facilitates cross-company comparability.
- Predefined Reference Flows and Functional Units: The reference flow (i.e., the quantity of product to which the PCF refers) and the functional unit (e.g., 1 kg of product) must be clearly defined and consistent within product categories. This helps prevent distortion when comparing values across suppliers.
- Defined Allocation Rules: When allocation is unavoidable, ISCC CFC applies ISO-based rules, providing clear guidance on when to use physical relationships (such as mass, energy content, etc.). This guarantees consistency in how emissions are allocated across co-products.
Participate in the CFC Training
On 28 October, we will host a dedicated training course for all interested parties that want to gain a clear understanding of the ISCC CFC approach and its guiding principles.
Raising the Bar: Our Added Requirements
- Accounting Standardisation of Mitigation Technologies: ISCC CFC sets clearly defined GHG accounting rules for specific mitigation technologies – including Carbon Capture and Utilisation (CCU) and Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) (v.1.3), as well as renewable energies and the future integration of mass balance with PCF certification (planned for v.1.4).
- Use of a Single Impact Assessment Method: ISCC CFC recommends the use of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) method for climate impact assessment – 100-year Global Warming Potential (GWP 100) – to ensure consistency across different life-cycle assessment (LCA) methods.
- Data Quality and Emission Factors: ISCC CFC categorises data sources by quality, with a strong preference for primary data (e.g., measured emissions or energy use) and verified secondary data (e.g., supplier-specific data) over generic databases (e.g., Ecoinvent). System Users must list all emission factors, justify their sources, and document whether the data is actual, specific, or generic. This is audited by a third-party auditor/Certification Body following a clear guided list of requirements.
- Transparency Through Documentation: ISCC CFC mandates that System Users compile and keep a comprehensive PCF Calculation File. This file should include details on product scope and system boundaries, data sources and assumptions, emission factors and allocations, methodological choices, and self-declarations regarding credit management and PCF communication. Such documentation is subject to review during audits and is fundamental to the certification decision.
These measures enhance comparability while providing sufficient flexibility for various applications. They are publicly available in our System Document, “ISCC Carbon Footprint Certification (v.1.3),” and must be applied by all System Users to obtain a CFC certificate. The trade-off? Less methodological freedom, but much greater transparency, comparability and usability – especially for industries aiming to report and compare emissions at scale.
Ready to Go Deeper?
Want to understand the details that set ISCC CFC apart from other PCF approaches?
