Carbon footprint is an estimate of the greenhouse emissions and climate change impact of activity – for example producing one kilogram of aquaculture feed. Typically, a carbon footprint is calculated by estimating not just the CO2 emissions that the activity in question causes, but also factors in emissions of other greenhouse gases (such as methane and nitrous oxide) and in some cases other types of climate impacts as well, for example the effect of deforestation. For simplicity, all these impacts are added together and expressed as a single number in terms of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2eq): the amount of CO2 that would create the same amount of warming.

The true carbon footprint of one kilogram of feed includes not only the direct GHG emissions resulting from the manufacturing process and the transportation of the feed to the farm. It also includes a whole host of indirect GHG emissions, such as those caused by growing the crops used in the feed, processing of feed ingredients, mining activities, production of vitamins, transport of the raw materials and so on. These are just a few of the processes involved. Transport of feed ingredients from the market to Norway is for instance less than 4% of the feed carbon footprint at the point where it is delivered to the fish farmer.

We use the PEFCR standard

The European Union's Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules (PEFCR) requires carbon footprint to be reported with the economic allocation method including land use change (LUC). So that is our primary calculation method. We also use market-based calculation for electricity as Norwegian authorities demands from Norwegian power suppliers. 

Click here to go back to the main page for emissions based on PEFCR, including LUC and with market-based calculation for electricity. 

Forest, Land and Agriculture (FLAG)
The forest, land and agriculture sector is one of the most affected by the impacts of climate change. But it is also a significant source of emissions. It represents nearly a quarter of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions - the largest emitting sector after energy.

To combat this issue, in September 2022 the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) launched the world’s first standard method for businesses in land-intensive sectors such as food, agriculture and forestry, to set science-based targets that include land-related emissions and removals - the Forest, Land and Agriculture (FLAG) Science Based Target Setting Guidance.

Skretting rely heavily on forests, land and agriculture (FLAG) for the production of the raw materials we use, so we are required to calculate our FLAG-related GHG emissions and set targets to reduce these emissions. FLAG target will be set soon, but we have already started to calculate and report our FLAG GHG emissions according to the draft “GHG Protocol Land Sector and Removals Guidance” (September 2022). The final guidance is anticipated to be published in mid 2024, according to Greenhouse Gas Protocol. 

Explanation of Carbon footprint (CO2eq) calculations (method)

Calculations are done based on calculation principles outlined in PEFCR feed for food producing animals (2018), aligned with ISO 14040/44:2006 plus the GHG Protocol Land Sector and the draft Removals Guidance (September 2022).

• Preferred database: GFLI; other quality-assured and accepted LCA databases were used if no ingredient specific dataset is available in GFLI
• FLAG: We use the Agri-Footprint FLAG database to define FLAG emissions for all LCA datasets we source from Agri-Footprint, and extrapolation of AFP FLAG database to GFLI database. the main source of secondary carbon footprint data for raw materials. FLAG assumptions for other LCA databases (agribalyse, ecoinvent), which mainly cover microingredients, are: agricultural product = 100% FLAG, non-agricultural product = 100% non-FLAG.
• Coverage: full bill of ingredients included, i.e. also trace elements and vitamins, in alignment with PEFCR feed standard
• Rework ingredients were assigned with average carbon footprint values of formulations across those latest formulations excl. rework
• Where no countries of origins are available, the global average dataset is selected; if no global average dataset is available the European average is taken, if this is also not available, a country-specific dataset is selected
• Inbound logistics for feed ingredients were calculated with estimated transport distances and intra-continentaland intercontinental global default data for international transport as given by the PEFCR Guide. For 2018 and 2019 we have used the same dataset as for 2020.

New method to calculate GHG emissions for Norwegian produced electricity increased the footprint from our own manufacturing process
In 2020 Norwegian authorities demanded that Norwegian power suppliers moved from location based to a market-based CO₂eq calculation with background in EU's Renewable Energy Directive. This is in compliance with the science-based target initiative (SBTI) which Skretting has committed to through our mother company Nutreco. For our standard calculations we use the market-based calculation for electricity for every year, also for the years prior to this new demand. Compared to historic printed reports, the number for 2018-2020 has increased due to this new calculation method. E.g. The location-based calculation had 10.7 g/CO₂eq for 1 KWh (IEA 2021), while the market-based calculation uses 405 g/CO₂eq for 1 KWh (NVE 2021). In 2022 the emission factor was 502 g/CO₂eq for 1 KWh (NVE 2022). The Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE), no longer reports emission factors for location-based, so we will stop the alternative reporting for location-based calculations from the 2023 report and forward.

Carbon footprint of Skretting Norway's fish feed calculated with the PEFCR standard: Economic allocation, LUC included and market-based calculations for electricity

Carbon footprint (CO₂eq) per kg feed economic allocated with LUC, market-based (PEFCR standard)

	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
Scope 1 (manufacturing process. direct GHG)	0.02	0.02	0.02	0.02	0.02	0.03
Scope 2 (manufacturing process. indirect GHG)*	0.06	0.04	0.04	0.04	0.04	0.05
Scope 3 (value chain. indirect GHG)*	1.61	1.71	2.33	2.58	2.76	3.19
Total CO2eq per 1 kg feed GHG footprint at factory gate	1.69	1.77	2.39	2.64	2.82	3.27

Carbon footprint (CO₂eq) absolute tonne emissions, economic allocated with LUC, market-based (PEFCR standard)

	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
Scope 1 (manufacturing process. direct GHG)	10,850	13,082	13,211	14,203	13,843	14,906
Scope 2 (manufacturing process. indirect GHG)‡	37,602	23,636	23,960	24,098	22,111	30,313
Scope 3 (value chain. indirect GHG)*	973,536	1,006,425	1,369,536	1,542,762	1,534,611	1,803,468
Total absolute tonne CO2eq GHG footprint at factory gate	1,021,988	1,043,143	1,406,707	1,581,063	1,570,565	1,848,687

‡ The increase in scope 2 from 2022 to 2023 and the decrease in scope 1, is because one of our boilers at the plant in Averøy was transformed from natural gas to electricity mid 2023. Since we use market-based calculation for scope 2 and not location-based, electricity in Norway has a larger emission factor than natural gas. So our absolute emissions actually increases when we go from fossil natural gas to electricity.

FLAG Breakdown of scope 3 (CO₂eq) per kg feed economic allocated with LUC, market-based (PEFCR standard)

	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
[Non-FLAG] Climate change fossil†	0.71	-	-	-	-	-
[Non-FLAG] Climate change land use change (LUC)	-	0.35	0.77	0.93	1.10	1.53
[FLAG] Climate Change LUC††	0.35	-	-	-	-	-
[FLAG] Climate Change Land management†††	0.45	-	-	-	-	-
[FLAG] Carbon removals and storage	NA	-	-	-	-	-
Inbound logistics	0.10	0.07	0.09	0.10	0.10	0.10
Scope 3, Climate change kg CO2eq per kg feed	1.61	-	-	-	-	-

Breakdown of Scope 3 (CO₂eq) absolute tonne emissions, economic allocated with LUC, market-based (PEFCR standard)

	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
Raw materials [Non-FLAG] Climate change fossil†	426,471	-	-	-	-	-
Raw materials [FLAG] Climate Change LUC††	160,749	-	-	-	-	-
Raw materials [FLAG] Climate change - peat	51,743	-	-	-	-	-
Raw materials [FLAG] Climate Change Land management†††	268,108	-	-	-	-	-
Raw materials [FLAG] Carbon removals and storage	NA	-	-	-	-	-
Total raw materials absolute tonne CO2eq	907,071	961,069	1,316,349	1,482,675	1,478,803	1,747,011
Inbound logistics	60,054	40,815	52,919	59,839	55,696	56,458
Packaging	5,945	4,147	-	-	-	-
Air travel employees	330	228	84	91	-	-
Fossil car travel employees	106	154	177	157	111	-
Electric car travel employees**	30	12	8	0	1	-
Total Scope 3 absolute tonne CO2eq GHG footprint at factory gate	973,536	1,006,425	1,369,536	1,542,762	1,534,611	1,803,468
Outbound logistics	23,901	23,706	22,160	22,883	19,828	-
Total Scope 3 absolute tonne CO2eq including outbound logistics***	997,437	1,030,131	1,391,696	1,565,645	1,554,439	-

† Excluding LUC, peat oxidation and land management emissions
†† Excluding peat oxidation
††† Non-LUC land-related emissions
* A market-based calculation for electricity is used for every year
** Including fuel. vehicle production. maintenance and road emissions for fossil and electric cars with market-based calculations for electricity
*** Outbond logistics only covers delivery by boat

Data without land use change (LUC)

Below are Skretting Norway's GHG emissions without land use change.

Economic allocation, without LUC and market-based calculations for electricity

Carbon footprint (CO₂eq) per kg feed economic allocated without LUC, market-based

	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
Scope 1 (manufacturing process. direct GHG)	0.02	0.02	0.02	0.02	0.02	0.03
Scope 2 (manufacturing process. indirect GHG)*	0.06	0.04	0.04	0.04	0.04	0.05
Scope 3 (value chain. indirect GHG)*	1.26	1.36	1.56	1.65	1.66	1.66
Total feed— GHG footprint at factory gate	1.34	1.43	1.62	1.71	1.72	1.74

Carbon footprint (CO₂eq) absolute tonne emissions, economic allocated without LUC, market-based

	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
Scope 1 (manufacturing process. direct GHG)	10,850	13,082	13,211	14,203	13,843	14,906
Scope 2 (manufacturing process. indirect GHG)*	37,602	23,636	23,960	24,098	22,111	30,313
Scope 3 (value chain. indirect GHG)*	761,044	802,640	916,508	965,969	972,783	972,770
Total absolute — GHG footprint at factory gate	809,496	839,359	953,679	1,004,270	1,008,737	1,017,989

Breakdown of Scope 3 (CO₂eq) absolute tonne emissions, economic allocated without LUC, market-based

	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018
Raw materials	694,579	757,285	863,320	905,882	916,976	916,313
Inbound logistics	60,054	40,815	52,919	59,839	55,696	56,458
Packaging	5,945	4,147	-	-	-	-
Air travel employees	330	228	84	91	-	-
Fossil car travel employees	106	154	177	157	111	-
Electric car travel employees***	30	11.9	8.2	0.1	0.5	-
Total Scope 3 — GHG footprint at factory gate	761,044	802,640	916,508	965,969	972,783	972,770
Outbound logistics*****	23,901	23,706	22,160	22,883	19,828	-
Total Scope 3 — GHG footprint including outbound logistics	784,945	826,347	938,668	988,853	992,611	-

* A market-based calculation for electricity is used for every year.
** A Location-based calculation for electricity is used for every year. [MÅ SLETTES]
*** Including fuel, vehicle production, maintenance and road emissions for fossil and electric cars with market-based calculations for electricity
**** Including fuel, vehicle production, maintenance and road emissions for fossil and electric cars with location-based calculations for electricity
***** Outbond logistics only covers delivery by boat.

Disclaimer
The provided carbon footprint data are based on internal calculations following the core guiding principles of the standard PEFCR Feed for Food Producing Animals (2018), but are not based on fully compliant PEFCR studies. Although Skretting has taken care to ensure that the information contained herein is as accurate as possible and up to date, Skretting does not warrant the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the information. The values have not been externally verified. The information provided is for informational purposes only and is intended for internal business use only. The reader is solely responsible for any interpretation or use of the material contained herein. The footprint data are subject to change (e.g. due to ongoing database development or better supply chain information). Furthermore, cradle-to-gate footprint values are not allowed to be used for comparison or comparative assertions among each other or with other feed footprint data in accordance with international LCA standards. Animal feed is an intermediate product in the food production chain and the footprint attached to it only reflects part of the life cycle. Without considering feed performance/ functionality and downstream impacts, comparison is neither allowed nor meaningful.