The increasing need for data exchange has been widely discussed. Significant differences exist between services offered to private users (B2C) and the needs of commercial users (B2B). In the B2C sector, dominant providers like Facebook, LinkedIn, and TikTok have emerged. These platforms primarily offer “free” services that are paid for by using personal data for advertising or through additional paid services.

In the B2B world, the situation is completely different. The data used here generally represents valuable company expertise and has considerable value for the company. In addition, “industrial” data is structured in a far less standardised way than B2C data. The very way in which data is recorded can therefore represent proprietary knowledge. But here too, the need for data exchange is increasing, driven by factors such as automation, sustainability, regulations and much more.

Typically, data exchange involves effort for the data provider and benefits for the data recipient. Given that data in the B2B sector is highly valuable to companies, the question arises: How can a functional ecosystem be created where all participants derive value?

Several approaches can address this, such as:

• Enhancing the utility of manufactured products through data. Products can self-manage, associated services can be offered, and their lifecycle can be tracked.
• Increasing manufacturing efficiency by passing on necessary data for subsequent processes, thereby reducing the effort required for data provision along the value chain.
• Developing system solutions that integrate data from other manufacturers, enabling the creation of proprietary, data-driven business models.

We support you in developing and implementing your business model with digital product passports and look forward to addressing your challenges.
Sustainably, for your success!

The topic of carbon footprints in general and in relation to organizations was already discussed in a previous post. However, the CO2 footprint of products, the CFP (= carbon footprint), is much more complex, but much more significant in terms of production costs and consumption behavior. This calculates how much CO2 equivalent is emitted into or removed from the atmosphere by a specific product. A distinction is made between the absolute value assigned to the product (CFP), which relates to the entire life cycle of the product, and the partial value (pCFP), which only describes a specific process or life cycle stage of the product. As we are generally talking about complex value chains, with numerous upstream and intermediate products and also with a large number of process steps and participants, it is easy to imagine that a whole range of influencing variables must quickly be considered here. Such a product-related analysis can be carried out in accordance with ISO 14067, for example, and the definition and description of the system boundaries is also very important here. Here too, the scopes are used to differentiate between the various causal chains. Scope 1 and Scope 2 refer to direct and indirect emissions caused by the use of fossil fuels or the purchase of energy. Scope 3, on the other hand, comprises 15 categories according to the globally recognized Greenhouse Gas Protocol (GHP). These range from emissions from purchased materials and input materials to emissions resulting from transportation processes and the assessment of process waste and product disposal. From a company’s perspective, the partial carbon footprint (pCFP) is particularly important, as it has little influence on the upstream and downstream value creation processes. With the help of the pCFP, good comparative statements can be made about products and processes. The absolute carbon footprint (CFP) is particularly interesting when certain product types are to be compared with each other, such as paper bags vs. plastic bags. In any case, however, comparability is only possible if the same system boundaries, input and reference values are used.

We look forward to talking to you and discussing your challenges.
Sustainably, for your success!

Everyone is talking about climate neutrality and with it the topic of the carbon footprint. This is intended to describe how many climate-relevant greenhouse gases are caused by an economic activity and serves as a general assessment standard, so to speak. However, a closer look reveals that the devil is in the detail.
First of all, it must be taken into account that there is a whole range of so-called greenhouse gases. In addition to the best-known carbon dioxide (CO2), which is inevitably produced in all combustion processes, methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O or laughing gas) are the most important other representatives. It should be noted that the climate-related effect of methane is around 25 times more intensive than that of CO2 and that of N2O around 300 times more intensive. For this reason, emissions are described using the so-called CO2 equivalent, which describes the effects of emissions as if they were caused exclusively by CO2. However, the direct economic activity of a company does not consist of emitting or extracting greenhouse gases into or from the atmosphere, but rather arises indirectly as a result of its business activities. The consumption of primary fuels such as coal, gas or oil is of course at the forefront, followed by the electrical energy purchased. However, the costs of transportation and travel, the materials used and land use can also play a relevant role. In order to bring some order to the various levels of consideration, the internationally recognized Green House Gas Protocol has developed so-called scopes. These differentiate between the various levels of causation. Scope 1 includes all emissions caused directly by the company itself, e.g. through its own fossil fuel-fired heating system or the operation of its own vehicle fleet. Scope 2 includes purchased energy such as electricity or district heating. Scope 3 should include all indirectly caused emissions from the upstream and downstream value chain. It quickly becomes clear that the issues of system boundaries and allocation pose major challenges.
But these are not the only challenges: The framework under consideration also varies and leads to different approaches and results. The CO2 footprint of an organization is often determined. This so-called greenhouse gas balance can be done with the help of ISO 14064-1, for example. Here, the CO2 equivalents that an organization causes within a period of time – usually one year – are determined. If you look at the scopes already introduced above, you can imagine that the values for scopes 1 and 2 can be determined quite easily. The inclusion of Scope 3, on the other hand, often leads to more complex determination approaches. Based on these values, organizations can then be compared quite practically with regard to their “climate efficiency”.

We look forward to engaging in dialog with you and addressing your challenges.
Sustainably, for your success!

The so-called Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive EU 2022/2464 (CSRD), which came into force at the beginning of January 2023, stipulates the date from which companies are obliged to prepare a sustainability report. As this is a directive, it must be transposed into national legislation by around mid-2024. Sustainability reporting includes a range of information, such as how the sustainability goals are reflected in the corporate strategy, explanations of the climate protection measures introduced or “a description of the most significant actual or potential negative impacts associated with the company’s business activities”. For financial years starting from 1 January 2025, for example, all large companies – in line with the EU’s definition of size – must include such a declaration in their reporting. According to estimates by renowned consulting firms, around 50,000 companies in Europe will then be affected by the reporting obligation, which together account for around 75% of the total turnover of European companies.

What needs to be done? The first step is to determine the extent to which your own company is affected by the reporting obligation. Then a concept needs to be developed on which to base the reporting. This depends heavily on the company itself. Are supply chains used that need to be analysed? What approach must be used to analyse the company’s emissions? What does the application of double materiality mean for the company in concrete terms?
Answering many such questions creates a basic framework into which the information for a report then flows. Of course, the principle of “as much as necessary, as little as possible” also applies here. Our aim is to structure your sustainability reporting in such a way that it fulfils the required reporting obligations in all respects and can still be implemented easily and without great effort.

We look forward to engaging in dialogue with you and addressing your challenges.
Sustainably, for your success!

At the end of 2021, insiders in the EU scene in Brussels were expecting 2022 to be the year of the “regulatory tsunami”. Well, the mills of the EU grind slowly: First, the Commission prepares a draft. This is discussed at various levels before the EU Parliament deals with it, votes on it and then the Council of Ministers decides, until the regulations are finally published in the Official Journal of the EU. Many of these projects that were initiated two years ago will now be finalised in the short term and are therefore topical: the European elections are just around the corner! Be it the Data Act PPWR, the ECO Design Directive, the harmonised labelling of building materials or the European emissions portal: This year, all of these regulations are expected to come into effect and so the extent and scope of the wave triggered by the Commission in 2022 will now gradually become visible in 2024.
The fact that many of these regulatory requirements are regulations and not directives has the advantage that they will take effect immediately and with the same wording in all member states. Directives are often transposed into national legislation with considerable delay and in different ways, which can lead to an inhomogeneous legal situation and thus to distortions of competition.
However, anyone who has ever looked at such European regulations will know that they are not only very extensive, but are also sometimes difficult to break down into specific cases of application. In addition, many paragraphs still have to be successively filled with specific provisions and there are numerous exceptions.

What does this mean for companies? The first step is to check whether the company is covered and affected by the regulations. This can depend on various factors, such as the sector or the size of the company. The resulting requirements for the company must then be determined before the most efficient and resource-saving implementation can be developed and tackled.

We look forward to engaging in dialogue with you and addressing your challenges.
Sustainably, for your success!

After extensive preparation, the time has come: Susphere is finally online.
The economic environment is changing rapidly. Energy, labour and financing costs are rising. The international economic environment is weakening and the domestic economy is shrinking. Added to this is a dramatically increasing flood of bureaucratic tasks such as non-financial reporting, supply chain legislation and CSRD reporting.
And now a sustainability network?
Yes, precisely because of this!

Because companies and entrepreneurs need to focus on their value creation right now and cannot afford any distractions from this core task. The topic of sustainability is also becoming increasingly important. As such, this is nothing new for SMEs, but focussing on the long-term consumption of resources requires new perspectives and methods. At the same time, there is a threat of major unproductive expenditure on implementation and documentation due to the rapidly increasing regulatory requirements.

This is precisely where we come in:
On the one hand, there are many good measures and projects that increase resource efficiency and are profitable from the perspectives of profitability and sustainability, such as analysing the carbon footprints of processes and products or improving the usability of materials and products through digital product passports. These need to be developed, planned and implemented.
On the other hand, there is a whole flood of new rules and challenges that need to be met, but which do not help the company economically. These must be evaluated as efficiently as possible in relation to the company, and the necessary data must be stored and documented.

We cannot change the framework conditions. But we can support you in processing the tasks that arise and thus conserve your company’s internal resources. So that you can continue to concentrate on the essentials.

We look forward to engaging in dialogue with you and addressing your challenges.
Sustainably, for your success!