The Kraft Heinz Company - Climate Change 2018
C0. Introduction
C0.1
(C0.1) Give a general description and introduction to your organization.
The Kraft Heinz Company (NASDAQ: KHC) is the fifth-largest food and beverage company in the world. A globally trusted producer of delicious foods, The Kraft Heinz Company provides high quality, great taste and nutrition for all eating occasions whether at home, in restaurants or on the go. The Company’s iconic brands include Kraft, Heinz, ABC, Capri Sun, Classico, Jell-O, Kool-Aid, Lunchables, Maxwell House, Ore-Ida, Oscar Mayer, Philadelphia, Planters, Plasmon, Quero, Weight Watchers Smart Ones and Velveeta. The Kraft Heinz Company is dedicated to the sustainable health of our people, our planet and our Company.
C0.2
(C0.2) State the start and end date of the year for which you are reporting data.
Start date End date Indicate if you are providing emissions data for past Select the number of past reporting years you will be providing reporting years emissions data for Row January 1 December 31 No
Row
Row
Row
C0.3
(C0.3) Select the countries/regions for which you will be supplying data. Australia Brazil Canada China Costa Rica France India Indonesia Italy Netherlands New Zealand Papua New Guinea Russian Federation South Africa Spain United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland United States of America Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)
CDP Page 1 of 55 C0.4
(C0.4) Select the currency used for all financial information disclosed throughout your response. USD
C0.5
(C0.5) Select the option that describes the reporting boundary for which climate-related impacts on your business are being reported. Note that this option should align with your consolidation approach to your Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas inventory. Operational control
C-AC0.6/C-FB0.6/C-PF0.6
(C-AC0.6/C-FB0.6/C-PF0.6) Are emissions from agricultural/forestry, processing/manufacturing, distribution activities or emissions from the consumption of your products – whether in your direct operations or in other parts of your value chain – relevant to your current CDP climate change disclosure?
Relevance Agriculture/Forestry Elsewhere in the value chain only [Agriculture/Forestry/processing/manufacturing/Distribution only]
Processing/Manufacturing Direct operations only [Processing/manufacturing/Distribution only]
Distribution Elsewhere in the value chain only [Agriculture/Forestry/processing/manufacturing/Distribution only] Consumption Yes [Consumption only]
C-AC0.6b/C-FB0.6b/C-PF0.6b
(C-AC0.6b/C-FB0.6b/C-PF0.6b) Why are emissions from agricultural/forestry activities undertaken on your own land not relevant to your current CDP climate change disclosure?
Row 1
Primary reason Do not own/manage land
Please explain Emissions from agricultural/forestry initiatives are relevant to our climate change disclosure but they are not part of our direct operations as we do not own land but instead source our ingredients and raw materials from global supply chains. These emissions are determined and disclosed as part of our Scope 3 accounting work.
C-AC0.6f/C-FB0.6f/C-PF0.6f
(C-AC0.6f/C-FB0.6f/C-PF0.6f) Why are emissions from distribution activities within your direct operations not relevant to your current CDP climate change disclosure?
Row 1
Primary reason Other, please specify (We do not own our distribution fleet)
Please explain We contract product distribution work to external partners globally. Such emissions from these activities are captured under our Scope 3 disclosure.
CDP Page 2 of 55 C-AC0.7/C-FB0.7/C-PF0.7
(C-AC0.7/C-FB0.7/C-PF0.7) Which agricultural commodity(ies) that your organization produces and/or sources are the most significant to your business by revenue? Select up to five.
Agricultural commodity Other, please specify (Dairy)
% of revenue dependent on this agricultural commodity Please select
Produced or sourced Sourced
Please explain It is estimated that the percentage of revenue dependent on this commodity is in the range between 25 to 30%.
Agricultural commodity Wheat
% of revenue dependent on this agricultural commodity Please select
Produced or sourced Sourced
Please explain It is estimated that the percentage of revenue dependent on this commodity is between 10 and 15%.
C1. Governance
C1.1
(C1.1) Is there board-level oversight of climate-related issues within your organization? Yes
C1.1a
(C1.1a) Identify the position(s) of the individual(s) on the board with responsibility for climate-related issues.
Position of Please explain individual(s) Director on The board of directors helps establish and oversee our global CSR objectives and framework, including matters related to our supply chain, the board environment, nutrition and well-being, and social issues. Members review relevant policies, processes and commitments, and receive updates from the CSR team on progress against key performance indicators and other relevant developments.
C1.1b
CDP Page 3 of 55 (C1.1b) Provide further details on the board’s oversight of climate-related issues.
Frequency Governance Please explain with mechanisms which into which climate- climate- related related issues issues are are integrated a scheduled agenda item Scheduled Reviewing and Our Board of Directors plays a crucial role in helping us live our Vision: To Be the Best Food Company, Growing a Better World. The – some guiding Board establishes corporate policies, sets strategic direction and oversees management, with such management being responsible for meetings strategy day-to-day operations. Specific to corporate social responsibility (CSR), the Board helps to establish and oversee our global CSR Reviewing and objectives and framework, including matters related to our supply chain, the environment, nutrition and well-being, and social issues. guiding major Members of the Board review significant CSR policies, processes and commitments, and receive updates from the CSR team on plans of action progress towards key CSR objectives and other relevant developments. The “CSR team” includes the Head of Global CSR, the Senior Reviewing and Vice President of Corporate and Government Affairs and the Chief Procurement Officer. guiding risk management policies Reviewing and guiding annual budgets Setting performance objectives Monitoring implementation and performance of objectives Overseeing major capital expenditures, acquisitions and divestitures Monitoring and overseeing progress against goals and targets for addressing climate-related issues
C1.2
(C1.2) Below board-level, provide the highest-level management position(s) or committee(s) with responsibility for climate- related issues.
Name of the position(s) and/or Responsibility Frequency of reporting to the board on climate-related issues committee(s)
Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Assessing climate-related risks and Annually opportunities
C1.2a
CDP Page 4 of 55 (C1.2a) Describe where in the organizational structure this/these position(s) and/or committees lie, what their associated responsibilities are, and how climate-related issues are monitored.
Our Board of Directors plays a crucial role in helping us live our Vision: To Be the Best Food Company, Growing a Better World. Comprised of diverse, experienced and qualified directors with strong leadership credentials, our board takes a thoughtful and tailored approach to our business. The board establishes corporate policies, sets strategic direction and oversees management, which is responsible for our day-to-day operations. Guided by its Corporate Governance Guidelines, the board aims to foster the Company’s long-term success and provides strategic direction to help us achieve meaningful results worldwide.
The Board of Directors helps establish and oversee our global CSR objectives and framework, including matters related to our supply chain, the environment, nutrition and well-being, and social issues. Members review all relevant policies, processes and commitments, and receive frequent updates from the CSR team on progress against key performance indicators and other relevant developments.
Our Executive Leadership Team provides oversight and executional leadership for our global CSR strategy. The Executive Leadership Team is led by Chief Executive Officer Bernardo Hees, and includes 18 executives representing a variety of disciplines, including Finance, Sales, Operations, Procurement, Marketing, Research and Development, Human Resources, Legal and Corporate Affairs. The Executive Leadership Team receives biannual progress reports from the CSR team, including topics related to climate- related issues.
C1.3
(C1.3) Do you provide incentives for the management of climate-related issues, including the attainment of targets? Yes
C1.3a
CDP Page 5 of 55 (C1.3a) Provide further details on the incentives provided for the management of climate-related issues.
Who is entitled to benefit from these incentives? Other, please specify (EVP Operations)
Types of incentives Monetary reward
Activity incentivized Energy reduction target
Comment
Who is entitled to benefit from these incentives? Other, please specify (Associate Director of International Engr)
Types of incentives Monetary reward
Activity incentivized Energy reduction target
Comment
Who is entitled to benefit from these incentives? Chief Procurement Officer (CPO)
Types of incentives Monetary reward
Activity incentivized Supply chain engagement
Comment
Who is entitled to benefit from these incentives? Environment/Sustainability manager
Types of incentives Monetary reward
Activity incentivized Other, please specify (Add description)
Comment
Who is entitled to benefit from these incentives? Other, please specify (Global Head of CSR)
Types of incentives Monetary reward
Activity incentivized Other, please specify (Overall Management of CSR Platform)
Comment
C2. Risks and opportunities
C2.1
CDP Page 6 of 55 (C2.1) Describe what your organization considers to be short-, medium- and long-term horizons.
From (years) To (years) Comment
Short-term 1 4
Medium-term 5 15 Long-term 16 30
C2.2
(C2.2) Select the option that best describes how your organization's processes for identifying, assessing, and managing climate-related issues are integrated into your overall risk management. Integrated into multi-disciplinary company-wide risk identification, assessment, and management processes
C2.2a
(C2.2a) Select the options that best describe your organization's frequency and time horizon for identifying and assessing climate-related risks.
Frequency of monitoring How far into the future are risks considered? Comment
Row 1 Annually 3 to 6 years
C2.2b
(C2.2b) Provide further details on your organization’s process(es) for identifying and assessing climate-related risks.
The Kraft Heinz Company leverages its strategic Enterprise Risk Management program to identify and prioritize key strategic, operational, financial, regulatory and compliance risks to the Company, including those related to climate; facilitate appropriate risk responses ; and provide an appropriate level of risk oversight to the Kraft Heinz Board of Directors and senior management. Kraft Heinz uses an annual global enterprise risk assessment process to help identify the impact, likelihood and control effectiveness of key risks based on a uniform risk framework. This allows all key risks to be prioritized by management to align proper allocation of resources, including people, budget, time and oversight. The risk prioritization / risk profile is reviewed by the Kraft Heinz Executive Leadership Team and Audit Committee. The criteria for determining materiality and the priority of a risk includes the following: 1) the impact to one of more of our brands, damage to our global reputation, and the impact to our operating income; 2) the likelihood of the risk materializing; 3) the effectiveness of current controls to mitigate the risk.
C2.2c
CDP Page 7 of 55 (C2.2c) Which of the following risk types are considered in your organization's climate-related risk assessments?
Relevance Please explain & inclusion Current Relevant, Risks associated with the status of current regulation across key areas of importance for the company are regularly considered as part of regulation always our Enterprise Risk Management process. These may include climate related risks, if those are identified as material for that year's risk included assessment cycle.
Emerging Relevant, Similar to current regulation risks, risks associated with emerging regulation are regularly considered as part of our Enterprise Risk regulation sometimes Management process. These may include climate related risks, if those are identified as material for that year's risk assessment cycle. included
Technology Not This risk area has not yet been incorporated as part of our risk assessment process. evaluated
Legal Relevant, Risks associated with climate related litigation claims have not yet been included as part of our risk assessment process. not included Market Relevant, Assessing potential risks associated with shifts on supply and demand for the agricultural raw materials and ingredients we purchase are always always included as part of our broader procurement risk management strategy in order to maintain a robust supply chain. Category risk included management leads in our procurement team are responsible for assessing potential risk sourcing scenarios and developing actions plans, as needed, in partnership with suppliers to manage those.
Reputation Relevant, Risks to our company's brand value and image are closely monitored and evaluated by our global corporate affairs team. CSR reputation always related issues are closely monitored, assessed and managed. These may include topics around lower carbon corporate performance. included Acute Relevant, Assessing risks related to the severity of extreme weather events, such as cyclones, hurricanes, or floods and their impact on our physical always operations are part of our operational management and business continuity efforts. included
Chronic Relevant, These type of risk have not yet been included. We will evaluate its inclusion in future risk assessment work. physical not included
Upstream Relevant, Assessing potential risks associated with shifts on supply and demand for the agricultural raw materials and ingredients we purchase are always always included as part of our broader procurement risk management strategy in order to maintain a robust supply chain. Category risk included management leads in our procurement team are responsible for assessing potential risk sourcing scenarios and developing actions plans in partnership with suppliers to manage those.
Downstream Relevant, not included
C2.2d
CDP Page 8 of 55 (C2.2d) Describe your process(es) for managing climate-related risks and opportunities.
Kraft Heinz recognizes the importance of managing our carbon footprint and the mitigation of the risks that are climate change driven. Our management strategy includes efforts in multiple areas where we feel we can make the greatest impact, addressing both our internal and external supply chains. Our strategy has a long-term view and is supported by a number of key platforms, including reducing greenhouse gas emissions in our global manufacturing operations; addressing the risk of deforestation in our supply chain; assessing water risks; and developing, implementing and driving sustainable agriculture practices for key ingredients/raw materials. One of our main current environmental sustainability targets calls for a 15% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions (measured in metric ton of GHG per ton of product produced) by the end of 2020 using 2015 as our baseline year. To drive progress against this target, we have developed a number of platforms, including a process to improve our energy consumption via energy conservation management (ECM); an energy metering and monitoring (EMM) system; and a program to assess and implement renewable energy projects globally. As part of our ECM program nearly 50% of our global manufacturing sites underwent a deep dive energy assessment by an expert engineering firm to identify opportunities and evaluate project feasibility. From this, we are implementing renewable energy projects at 4 manufacturing sites and will continue to explore feasibility for renewable energy projects globally. Furthermore, in 2018 we are committing to setting a science-based GHG emission reduction target that is aligned with the requirements detailed by the SBTI program. This target will help us identify areas of focus to reduce our carbon footprint and become a more climate resilient organization.
In regards to managing deforestation risks, in 2017 we partnered with an external environmental NGO to guide our efforts in developing and implementing our global Sustainable Palm Oil Policy. The same year we mapped out 90% of our direct palm oil supply chain to the mill and completed a baseline deforestation risk assessment of all our direct palm oil suppliers. This effort allows us to work with our suppliers to address sourcing risks in our supply chain around deforestation. In 2018 we expanded our palm oil deforestation risk assessment efforts to include our global co-manufacturers that utilize palm oil as an ingredient. We are also working to develop a formal corporate commitment/policy focused on deforestation. These efforts highlight our commitment to focus and drive improvement in this important area.
In early 2018 we partnered with an external accredited CDP water consultant firm to complete a global water risk assessment of all our direct manufacturing plants. This exercise allowed us to map and identify physical, regulatory, quality, and reputational risks related to water across our all our direct global operations and will help us develop and implement site specific plans to address these more actively.
Also, recognizing the impact that agricultural practices have on the environment, Kraft Heinz has developed and leverages the Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) platform in which Kraft Heinz agronomists directly engage growers and farmers of key raw materials to enact best practices that lead to environmental efficiencies, such as increased yields, optimization of fertilizer application, water conservation and an overall increase in crop resilience. Kraft Heinz also created the Heinz Seed Program, where tomato seeds are custom developed for the specific region in which they will be grown and designed to minimize required inputs and resource use.
All of these practices are the foundation of our current strategy to address climate change risks. We are committed to continue to identify opportunities for improvement in the managing of climate related risks.
C2.3
(C2.3) Have you identified any inherent climate-related risks with the potential to have a substantive financial or strategic impact on your business? No
C2.3b
CDP Page 9 of 55 (C2.3b) Why do you not consider your organization to be exposed to climate-related risks with the potential to have a substantive financial or strategic impact on your business?
Primary Please explain reason
Row Risks exist, We recognize that our organization is exposed to climate relates risks but we don’t consider them to have a potential substantive financial impact 1 but none to our business due to actions that we have taken to minimize these. Some examples of risks are: risk related to energy taxes and regulations, with changes in precipitation extremes and droughts that could affect both our direct operations and the supply chain of our agricultural commodities potential to and ingredients. We manage these risks in the following way: on taxes and regulations: we monitor regulatory activity including environmental have a legislation, to understand and anticipate relevant changes and developments. This is done through external engagement, mostly through trade substantive associations and non-governmental organizations (NGOs). We evaluate the potential impact internally across functions and divisions. For financial or changes in precipitation and extreme droughts in or direct operations: Natural disaster (hurricane, flood, etc.) plans have been developed and are strategic in place for all facilities at risk. Flood dikes have been put in place in a number of sites to protect against flooding. Considering drought impact on conditions, the corporate water reduction platforms help us identify and manage opportunities to reduce water consumption and increase business efficiency. Strategic partnerships have been established to drive water reduction initiatives at our manufacturing plants. We are evaluating water scarcity risks to develop strategies and mitigate those. For risks due to precipitation and extreme droughts in our supply chain: risks are mitigated by business continuity planning (BCP), which allows us to have a well thought-out business plan to react to disruptions caused by a given crisis. This BCP process also addresses potential impacts to the sourcing (supply chain) of our ingredients and materials. We closely manage commodity sourcing: our procurement and R&D teams actively work to qualify alternate ingredient and material suppliers, which provides us with flexibility in responding to interruptions in the supply chain that may be related to climate change.
C2.4
(C2.4) Have you identified any climate-related opportunities with the potential to have a substantive financial or strategic impact on your business? Yes
C2.4a
CDP Page 10 of 55 (C2.4a) Provide details of opportunities identified with the potential to have a substantive financial or strategic impact on your business.
Identifier Opp1
Where in the value chain does the opportunity occur? Direct operations
Opportunity type Resource efficiency
Primary climate-related opportunity driver Use of more efficient production and distribution processes
Type of financial impact driver Reduced operating costs (e.g., through efficiency gains and cost reductions)
Company- specific description The potential for energy regulations and taxes has encouraged us to improve the energy efficiency of our operations. Reducing energy use reduces operational costs and may avoid or reduce potential new costs due to regulation and taxes on energy/carbon. Every year we implement initiatives globally to reduce energy use.
Time horizon Current
Likelihood Very likely
Magnitude of impact Medium-low
Potential financial impact
Explanation of financial impact
Strategy to realize opportunity
Cost to realize opportunity
Comment
C2.5
(C2.5) Describe where and how the identified risks and opportunities have impacted your business.
Impact Description
Products and We have not services identified any risks or opportunities
Supply chain We have not and/or value identified any risks or chain opportunities Adaptation We have not and mitigation identified any risks or activities opportunities Investment in We have not R&D identified any risks or opportunities Operations Impacted The development and implementation of measures and projects to drive energy efficiency and reduce our resource consumption is an opportunity that has helped us achieve operational cost savings. Continued engagement in this area will drive cost and resource efficiencies.
Other, please Please select specify
CDP Page 11 of 55 C2.6
(C2.6) Describe where and how the identified risks and opportunities have factored into your financial planning process.
Relevance Description
Revenues Please select Operating costs Please select Capital expenditures / capital allocation Not evaluated
Acquisitions and divestments Not evaluated Access to capital Not evaluated
Assets Not evaluated Liabilities Not evaluated Other Please select
C3. Business Strategy
C3.1
(C3.1) Are climate-related issues integrated into your business strategy? Yes
C3.1a
(C3.1a) Does your organization use climate-related scenario analysis to inform your business strategy? No, and we do not anticipate doing so in the next two years
C-AC3.1b/C-CE3.1b/C-CH3.1b/C-CO3.1b/C-EU3.1b/C-FB3.1b/C-MM3.1b/C-OG3.1b/C-PF3.1b/C- ST3.1b/C-TO3.1b/C-TS3.1b)
(C-AC3.1b/C-CE3.1b/C-CH3.1b/C-CO3.1b/C-EU3.1b/C-FB3.1b/C-MM3.1b/C-OG3.1b/C-PF3.1b/C-ST3.1b/C-TO3.1b/C-TS3.1b) Indicate whether your organization has developed a low-carbon transition plan to support the long-term business strategy. No, we do not have a low-carbon transition plan
C3.1c
CDP Page 12 of 55 (C3.1c) Explain how climate-related issues are integrated into your business objectives and strategy.
Given our focus on advancing environmental sustainability and improving the sustainability of our supply chain, we integrate climate- related issues into our business strategy at Kraft Heinz. We recognize the need to integrate practices/programs that decrease our carbon footprint both in our direct operations and in other areas of our value chain to advance our Vision To Be the Best Food Company, Growing a Better World, and as part of our broader contribution to mitigating the risks associated with global climate change. In addition to improving our planet and bettering society at-large, we also see a growing number of key stakeholders – like customers, investors, consumers and our own employees – developing a keen interest on this important topic. Thus, we have taken several actions that highlight the integration of climate-related issues into our business strategy: 1. Setting targets to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions and our energy consumption per ton of product produced, from our direct operations, by 15% by 2020 from a 2015 baseline; 2. Investing in renewable energy technology for our manufacturing plants; 3. Developing a sustainable palm oil policy and sourcing commitments that align with principles looking to curb deforestation; 4. Conducting a mapping of our direct supply chain of palm oil to assess potential deforestation risks and develop action plans to manage these in partnership with our suppliers; 5. Leveraging the Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) platform in which Kraft Heinz agronomists directly engage growers and farmers of key raw materials to enact best practices that lead to environmental efficiencies, such as increased yields, optimization of fertilizer application, water conservation and an overall increase in crop resilience. 6. joining the Science Based Targets Initiative and working to set science-based greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals in its supply chain 7. supporting the move toward a circular economy by aiming to make 100 percent of our packaging globally recyclable, reusable or compostable by 2025.
C3.1g
(C3.1g) Why does your organization not use climate-related scenario analysis to inform your business strategy?
We have not yet adopted a formal climate-related scenario analysis process to inform our business strategy mainly because we have been leveraging subject matter knowledge gained through our interactions with external organizations, partners/consultants, NGOs, industry groups and customers. We would like to highlight that even though a formal climate related scenario analysis has not been utilized at our company, we have still incorporated key climate related factors into our business strategy.
C4. Targets and performance
C4.1
(C4.1) Did you have an emissions target that was active in the reporting year? Intensity target
C4.1b
CDP Page 13 of 55 (C4.1b) Provide details of your emissions intensity target(s) and progress made against those target(s).
Target reference number Int 1
Scope Scope 1+2 (location-based)
% emissions in Scope 100
% reduction from baseline year 15
Metric Metric tons CO2e per metric ton of product
Base year 2015
Start year 2016
Normalized baseline year emissions covered by target (metric tons CO2e) 0.2
Target year 2020
Is this a science-based target? No, but we anticipate setting one in the next 2 years
% achieved (emissions) 64
Target status Underway
Please explain We provided progress against this 2020 target on last year's submission. In 2017 we achieved a 9.6% reduction in MT CO2-eq/MT of product produced.
% change anticipated in absolute Scope 1+2 emissions 10
% change anticipated in absolute Scope 3 emissions 0
C4.2
CDP Page 14 of 55 (C4.2) Provide details of other key climate-related targets not already reported in question C4.1/a/b.
Target Waste
KPI – Metric numerator Ton of product sent to landfill
KPI – Metric denominator (intensity targets only) Ton of product produced
Base year 2015
Start year 2016
Target year 2020
KPI in baseline year 0.01
KPI in target year 0.0085
% achieved in reporting year 69
Target Status Underway
Please explain
Part of emissions target
Is this target part of an overarching initiative? Please select
C4.3
(C4.3) Did you have emissions reduction initiatives that were active within the reporting year? Note that this can include those in the planning and/or implementation phases. Yes
C4.3a
(C4.3a) Identify the total number of projects at each stage of development, and for those in the implementation stages, the estimated CO2e savings.
Number of projects Total estimated annual CO2e savings in metric tonnes CO2e (only for rows marked *) Under investigation 120 To be implemented* 22
Implementation commenced* 5 Implemented* 17 Not to be implemented 13
C4.3b
CDP Page 15 of 55 (C4.3b) Provide details on the initiatives implemented in the reporting year in the table below.
Activity type Low-carbon energy installation
Description of activity Solar PV
Estimated annual CO2e savings (metric tonnes CO2e) 1250
Scope Scope 2 (location-based) Scope 2 (market-based)
Voluntary/Mandatory Voluntary
Annual monetary savings (unit currency – as specified in CC0.4) 260000
Investment required (unit currency – as specified in CC0.4)
Payback period 1-3 years
Estimated lifetime of the initiative 11-15 years
Comment
Activity type Energy efficiency: Building fabric
Description of activity Other, please specify (Lighting upgrades (Multiple sites))
Estimated annual CO2e savings (metric tonnes CO2e) 850
Scope Scope 2 (location-based) Scope 2 (market-based)
Voluntary/Mandatory Voluntary
Annual monetary savings (unit currency – as specified in CC0.4) 410000
Investment required (unit currency – as specified in CC0.4)
Payback period 1-3 years
Estimated lifetime of the initiative 16-20 years
Comment
Activity type Energy efficiency: Processes
Description of activity Compressed air
Estimated annual CO2e savings (metric tonnes CO2e) 700
Scope Scope 2 (location-based)
CDP Page 16 of 55 Scope 2 (market-based)
Voluntary/Mandatory Voluntary
Annual monetary savings (unit currency – as specified in CC0.4) 275000
Investment required (unit currency – as specified in CC0.4)
Payback period 1-3 years
Estimated lifetime of the initiative 11-15 years
Comment
C4.3c
(C4.3c) What methods do you use to drive investment in emissions reduction activities?
Method Comment
Internal The advancement of our corporate sustainability energy and energy/GHG emission reduction goals are part of the business and incentives/recognition performance goals of key KH functions, Resources in these roles are tasked with identifying and implementing project investment programs opportunities that drive our reduction goals forward.
Compliance with We invest in assets and implement projects/initiatives, as needed, in order to comply with regulatory standards and requirements related regulatory to GHG emissions. requirements/standards
C4.5
(C4.5) Do you classify any of your existing goods and/or services as low-carbon products or do they enable a third party to avoid GHG emissions? No
C5. Emissions methodology
C5.1
CDP Page 17 of 55 (C5.1) Provide your base year and base year emissions (Scopes 1 and 2).
Scope 1
Base year start January 1 2015
Base year end December 31 2015
Base year emissions (metric tons CO2e) 769761
Comment
Scope 2 (location-based)
Base year start January 1 2015
Base year end December 31 2015
Base year emissions (metric tons CO2e) 795242
Comment
Scope 2 (market-based)
Base year start January 1 2015
Base year end December 31 2015
Base year emissions (metric tons CO2e) 804156
Comment
C5.2
(C5.2) Select the name of the standard, protocol, or methodology you have used to collect activity data and calculate Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions. The Climate Registry: General Reporting Protocol The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (Revised Edition) Other, please specify (U.S. EPA Egrid 2014 Database)
C5.2a
(C5.2a) Provide details of the standard, protocol, or methodology you have used to collect activity data and calculate Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions.
Beyond the standards and protocols checked in the prior sections, we also utilized U.S. EPA Egrid factors to calculate Scope 2 emissions for our US based operations.
C6. Emissions data
CDP Page 18 of 55 C6.1
(C6.1) What were your organization’s gross global Scope 1 emissions in metric tons CO2e?
Row 1
Gross global Scope 1 emissions (metric tons CO2e) 709692
End-year of reporting period
Comment
C6.2
(C6.2) Describe your organization’s approach to reporting Scope 2 emissions.
Row 1
Scope 2, location-based We are reporting a Scope 2, location-based figure
Scope 2, market-based We are reporting a Scope 2, market-based figure
Comment
C6.3
(C6.3) What were your organization’s gross global Scope 2 emissions in metric tons CO2e?
Row 1
Scope 2, location-based 756918
Scope 2, market-based (if applicable) 765557
End-year of reporting period
Comment We leveraged residual emission factors to calculate our Scope 2 market based emissions.
C6.4
(C6.4) Are there any sources (e.g. facilities, specific GHGs, activities, geographies, etc.) of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions that are within your selected reporting boundary which are not included in your disclosure? Yes
C6.4a
CDP Page 19 of 55 (C6.4a) Provide details of the sources of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions that are within your selected reporting boundary which are not included in your disclosure.
Source Research and Development technology center
Relevance of Scope 1 emissions from this source Emissions are not evaluated
Relevance of location-based Scope 2 emissions from this source Emissions are not evaluated
Relevance of market-based Scope 2 emissions from this source (if applicable) Emissions are not evaluated
Explain why the source is excluded Our Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions baseline setting, accounting and progress reporting focuses on our directly owned manufacturing facilities which are the most relevant contributors to our emissions.
Source Distribution Centers/Warehouses
Relevance of Scope 1 emissions from this source Emissions are not evaluated
Relevance of location-based Scope 2 emissions from this source Emissions are not evaluated
Relevance of market-based Scope 2 emissions from this source (if applicable) Emissions are not evaluated
Explain why the source is excluded Our Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions baseline setting, accounting and progress reporting focuses on our directly owned manufacturing facilities which are the most relevant contributors to our emissions.
C6.5
(C6.5) Account for your organization’s Scope 3 emissions, disclosing and explaining any exclusions.
CDP Page 20 of 55 Purchased goods and services
Evaluation status Relevant, calculated
Metric tonnes CO2e 16751871.94
Emissions calculation methodology Impact Assessment method used was IPCC 2013 factors (AR5). Calculations are based on data on procurement purchases of raw materials, ingredients and agricultural commodities. Most procured line items had sourcing country information. Life cycle inventory data for ingredients came from the WFLDB, ecoinvent v3, Agrifootprint, and our third party consultant's ’ internal database. If possible, country-specific data was assigned. If a country-specific dataset was not available, the regional or global average was used. For the modeling of packaging materials, it was assumed that Flexible Resin and Blow Molding & Resin are made of LDPE. It was assumed Injection Molding & Thermoforming packages are 32% LDPE and 68% PP based on the ratio of waste material in the ecoinvent dataset for blow molding. It was assumed that Cartons & Aseptic Cardboard are best represented by the ecoinvent dataset for liquid packaging board container. It was assumed that the Metal & Glass category was 95% glass by weight based on the distribution of weight between lid and jar for a National pickle jar from http://cstlcsm.semo.edu/srovermann/ui360/handouts2012/Household%20Trash%20Weights%20UI%20360%20SP2012.pdf. It was assumed that Corrugated & Labels could be represented by paper. In addition to raw material production, the impacts of package production (i.e. blow molding of resin pellets into a bottle shape) were included using data from ecoinvent v3. No recycled content was accounted for in alignment with the cut-off approach to modeling recycling impacts and benefits suggested by the GHG Protocol.
Percentage of emissions calculated using data obtained from suppliers or value chain partners
Explanation
Capital goods
Evaluation status Relevant, calculated
Metric tonnes CO2e 739999.79
Emissions calculation methodology Impacts were estimated using the dataset for “Material handling equipment manufacturing” from the 2002 US Input Output Database.
Percentage of emissions calculated using data obtained from suppliers or value chain partners
Explanation
Fuel-and-energy-related activities (not included in Scope 1 or 2)
Evaluation status Relevant, calculated
Metric tonnes CO2e 1352970.13
Emissions calculation methodology Scope 1 and 2 energy and fuel data by type was utilized for these calculations. Scope 3 emissions for these energy types were taken from https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-09/documents/emission-factors_nov_2015_v2.pdf
Percentage of emissions calculated using data obtained from suppliers or value chain partners
Explanation
CDP Page 21 of 55 Upstream transportation and distribution
Evaluation status Relevant, calculated
Metric tonnes CO2e 191539.38
Emissions calculation methodology Transportation data for North America region was provided in miles and gallons used. Gallons data was used to do the calculations. The emissions were extrapolated to global ingredient and packaging weight. Truck and refrigerated truck inputs were used as provided. Intermodal gallons were distributed equally between truck and rail. LCI emissions are from ecoinventv3.
Percentage of emissions calculated using data obtained from suppliers or value chain partners
Explanation
Waste generated in operations
Evaluation status Relevant, calculated
Metric tonnes CO2e 49063.7
Emissions calculation methodology Data on waste in 2017 sent to landfill and sent to recycling were used for the calculations. Impacts and credits of recycling were excluded following the cut-off approach suggested in the GHG protocol. Emissions from the treatment of landfill waste were estimated using the ecoinvent v3 dataset for treating average municipal solid waste in sanitary landfill in Switzerland.
Percentage of emissions calculated using data obtained from suppliers or value chain partners
Explanation
Business travel
Evaluation status Relevant, calculated
Metric tonnes CO2e 18587.51
Emissions calculation methodology Global data on miles traveled by air and rail in all regions globally, number of room-nights spent in hotels, and number of cars and days used for travel in rental cars were used for calculations. Air and rail miles were converted to person-km and emissions were estimated using ecoinvent v3 datasets for global average transport by aircraft and train. Rental-car days were multiplied by an assumption of 100 miles per day (from http://www.autorentalnews.com/channel/rental-operations/article/story/2010/06/unlimited- miles-ormileage-caps.aspx) to calculate total miles driven by rental cars. Emissions were estimated using the ecoinvent v3 dataset for transport by passenger car in Europe per mile. Hotel nights were multiplied by a factor of 15.13 kg CO2-eq per hotel night from https://carbonfund.org/how-we-calculate/
Percentage of emissions calculated using data obtained from suppliers or value chain partners
Explanation
CDP Page 22 of 55 Employee commuting
Evaluation status Relevant, calculated
Metric tonnes CO2e 189896.51
Emissions calculation methodology Data on the total number of global employees in 2017 was used for these calculation. It was assumed that each employee takes 2 trips per day and works 261 days per year (https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/pay-administration/fact- sheets/computinghourly-rates-of-pay-using-the-2087-hour-divisor/). Per trip, a distance of 14 miles is assumed based on data from the USDOT OmniStat household survey from 2003 http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/publications/omnistats/volume_03_issue_04/html/figure_02.html). Usage of different modes of transportation is estimated based on data from 2009 commuting data from the US Census Bureau (https://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/acs-15.pdf). LCI emissions for each mode of transport are from ecoinvent v3.
Percentage of emissions calculated using data obtained from suppliers or value chain partners
Explanation
Upstream leased assets
Evaluation status Not evaluated
Metric tonnes CO2e
Emissions calculation methodology
Percentage of emissions calculated using data obtained from suppliers or value chain partners
Explanation We do not consider this category as relevant to our Scope 3 accounting as other parts of our value chain such as .
Downstream transportation and distribution
Evaluation status Relevant, calculated
Metric tonnes CO2e 1203705.71
Emissions calculation methodology Transportation data for North America region in miles and gallons was used to model global footprint for this category. Gallons data was used to perform the calculations. The emissions were extrapolated to global ingredient and packaging weight. Truck and refrigerated truck inputs were used as provided. Intermodal gallons were distributed equally between truck and rail. LCI emissions are from ecoinvent v3.
Percentage of emissions calculated using data obtained from suppliers or value chain partners
Explanation
Processing of sold products
Evaluation status Relevant, calculated
Metric tonnes CO2e
Emissions calculation methodology
Percentage of emissions calculated using data obtained from suppliers or value chain partners
Explanation Calculations for these category are included in the 'Use of Sold Products' number reported below.
CDP Page 23 of 55 Use of sold products
Evaluation status Relevant, calculated
Metric tonnes CO2e 970000
Emissions calculation methodology The emissions reported here reflect a rough prediction of the emissions from the use of products. The emissions during the use of products include aspects of refrigeration, freezing, baking, boiling, toasting, microwaving, and stove top preparation. For each of these categories, assumptions have been made of the proportion of total Kraft Heinz products sold that are likely to undergo each use. For simplicity, it has currently been assumed that all use activities are fueled by electricity. Approximations are then made of the amount of electricity use required per kilogram of product. These approximations are made based on preliminary estimates of typical consumer behaviors and are generic among product categories. The total amount of electricity use is then estimated based on emissions factors taken from the Ecoinvent database for several countries or an adapted dataset from IEA electricity statistics. The emissions accuracy for this category is estimated at +/- 40%.
Percentage of emissions calculated using data obtained from suppliers or value chain partners
Explanation
End of life treatment of sold products
Evaluation status Relevant, calculated
Metric tonnes CO2e 51440.68
Emissions calculation methodology The mass of each type of packaging material used in Category 1 were used to estimate amount of waste at the consumer level. Rates of recycling and incineration with energy recovery for each type of material / package were taken from EPA MSW data for 2014 (https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-11/documents/2014_smm_tablesfigures_508.pdf). Impacts and benefits of recycling are excluded following the cut-off approach suggested by GHG protocol. The same logic was applied to waste to energy. The remaining percentage of waste (that not recycled or incinerated), was calculated and modeled as being sent to landfill using ecoinvent v3 datasets.
Percentage of emissions calculated using data obtained from suppliers or value chain partners
Explanation
Downstream leased assets
Evaluation status Not evaluated
Metric tonnes CO2e
Emissions calculation methodology
Percentage of emissions calculated using data obtained from suppliers or value chain partners
Explanation
Franchises
Evaluation status Not evaluated
Metric tonnes CO2e
Emissions calculation methodology
Percentage of emissions calculated using data obtained from suppliers or value chain partners
Explanation
CDP Page 24 of 55 Investments
Evaluation status Not evaluated
Metric tonnes CO2e
Emissions calculation methodology
Percentage of emissions calculated using data obtained from suppliers or value chain partners
Explanation
Other (upstream)
Evaluation status Not evaluated
Metric tonnes CO2e
Emissions calculation methodology
Percentage of emissions calculated using data obtained from suppliers or value chain partners
Explanation
Other (downstream)
Evaluation status Not evaluated
Metric tonnes CO2e
Emissions calculation methodology
Percentage of emissions calculated using data obtained from suppliers or value chain partners
Explanation
C-AC6.6/C-FB6.6/C-PF6.6
(C-AC6.6/C-FB6.6/C-PF6.6) Can you breakdown your Scope 3 emissions by relevant business activity areas? Partially
C-AC6.6a/C-FB6.6a/C-PF6.6a
CDP Page 25 of 55 (C-AC6.6a/C-FB6.6a/C-PF6.6a) Disclose your Scope 3 emissions for each of your relevant business activity areas.
Activity Agriculture/Forestry
Scope 3 category Purchased goods and services
Emissions (metric tons CO2e) 14555855.3
Please explain Global procurement data for food ingredients and agricultural commodities were used to calculate this Scope 3 category. Sourcing country of origin information was available and leveraged for the calculations. Life cycle inventory data for ingredients came from the WFLDB, ecoinvent v3, Agrifootprint, and our third party consultant's ’ internal database. If possible, country-specific data was assigned. If a country-specific dataset was not available, the regional or global average was used. Impact Assessment method used was IPCC 2013 factors (AR5).
Activity Distribution
Scope 3 category Upstream transportation and distribution
Emissions (metric tons CO2e) 191539.38
Please explain Transportation data for North America region was provided in miles and gallons used. Gallons data was used to do the calculations. The emissions were extrapolated to global ingredient and packaging weight. Truck and refrigerated truck inputs were used as provided. Intermodal gallons were distributed equally between truck and rail. LCI emissions are from ecoinventv3.
Activity Distribution
Scope 3 category Downstream transportation and distribution
Emissions (metric tons CO2e) 1203705.71
Please explain Transportation data for North America region in miles and gallons was used to model global footprint for this category. Gallons data was used to perform the calculations. The emissions were extrapolated to global ingredient and packaging weight. Truck and refrigerated truck inputs were used as provided. Intermodal gallons were distributed equally between truck and rail. LCI emissions are from ecoinvent v3.
C6.7
(C6.7) Are carbon dioxide emissions from biologically sequestered carbon relevant to your organization? No
C-AC6.8/C-FB6.8/C-PF6.8
(C-AC6.8/C-FB6.8/C-PF6.8) Is biogenic carbon pertaining to your direct operations relevant to your current CDP climate change disclosure? No
CDP Page 26 of 55 C-AC6.9/C-FB6.9/C-PF6.9
(C-AC6.9/C-FB6.9/C-PF6.9) Do you collect or calculate greenhouse gas emissions for each commodity reported as significant to your business in C-AC0.7/FB0.7/PF0.7?
Agricultural commodities Wheat
Do you collect or calculate GHG emissions for this commodity? Yes
Please explain The GHG emissions calculated for these commodities are based on our global procurement data.
Agricultural commodities Other (Dairy)
Do you collect or calculate GHG emissions for this commodity? Yes
Please explain The GHG emissions calculated for these commodities are based on our global procurement data.
Agricultural commodities Other (Nuts)
Do you collect or calculate GHG emissions for this commodity? Yes
Please explain The GHG emissions calculated for these commodities are based on our global procurement data.
C-AC6.9a/C-FB6.9a/C-PF6.9a
CDP Page 27 of 55 (C-AC6.9a/C-FB6.9a/C-PF6.9a) Report your greenhouse gas emissions figure(s) for your disclosing commodity(ies), explain your methodology, and include any exclusions.
Wheat
Reporting emissions by Total
Emissions (metric tons CO2e) 643784
Denominator: unit of production
Change from last reporting year This is our first year of measurement
Please explain Life cycle inventory data for ingredients came from the WFLDB, ecoinvent v3, Agrifootprint, and our third party consultant's ’ internal database. If possible, country-specific data was assigned. If a country-specific dataset was not available, the regional or global average was used. Impact Assessment method used was IPCC 2013 factors (AR5).
Other
Reporting emissions by Total
Emissions (metric tons CO2e) 7424648
Denominator: unit of production
Change from last reporting year This is our first year of measurement
Please explain The emissions data above is for the dairy category. Life cycle inventory data for ingredients came from the WFLDB, ecoinvent v3, Agrifootprint, and our third party consultant's ’ internal database. If possible, country-specific data was assigned. If a country- specific dataset was not available, the regional or global average was used. Impact Assessment method used was IPCC 2013 factors (AR5).
C6.10
CDP Page 28 of 55 (C6.10) Describe your gross global combined Scope 1 and 2 emissions for the reporting year in metric tons CO2e per unit currency total revenue and provide any additional intensity metrics that are appropriate to your business operations.
Intensity figure 0.000056224
Metric numerator (Gross global combined Scope 1 and 2 emissions) 1466610
Metric denominator unit total revenue
Metric denominator: Unit total 26085000000
Scope 2 figure used Location-based
% change from previous year 2.84
Direction of change Decreased
Reason for change We estimate this decrease is due to implemented energy efficiency and reduction measures, to changes in our manufacturing footprint including the modernization of manufacturing assets at a number of our plants and changes in our manufacturing footprint which includes the optimization and consolidation of manufacturing sites.
C7. Emissions breakdowns
C7.1
(C7.1) Does your organization have greenhouse gas emissions other than carbon dioxide? Yes
C7.1a
(C7.1a) Break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by greenhouse gas type and provide the source of each used greenhouse warming potential (GWP).
Greenhouse gas Scope 1 emissions (metric tons of CO2e) GWP Reference CO2 704279 IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5 – 100 year)
CH4 4541 IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5 – 100 year)
N2O 872 IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5 – 100 year)
C7.2
CDP Page 29 of 55 (C7.2) Break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by country/region.
Country/Region Scope 1 emissions (metric tons CO2e)
United States of America 408461
Canada 40523 Mexico 2685
Costa Rica 795
Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) 11348 Brazil 21685
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland 31445
France 1291
Spain 6858 Netherlands 8583
Italy 15009
Poland 12231 Russian Federation 14083
Egypt 254
South Africa 2756 India 5177
Indonesia 31723
China 32460 New Zealand 38575
Australia 23750
C7.3
(C7.3) Indicate which gross global Scope 1 emissions breakdowns you are able to provide. By business division
C7.3a
(C7.3a) Break down your total gross global Scope 1 emissions by business division.
Business division Scope 1 emissions (metric ton CO2e)
U.S. Business Zone 408461
Canadian Business Zone 40523 Latin America (LATAM) Business Zone 36514
EMEA (Europe-Middle East- Africa) Business Zone 78426
APAC (Asia Pacific) Business Zone 145768
C-AC7.4/C-FB7.4/C-PF7.4
(C-AC7.4/C-FB7.4/C-PF7.4) Do you include emissions pertaining to your business activity(ies) in your direct operations as part of your global gross Scope 1 figure? Yes
C-AC7.4b/C-FB7.4b/C-PF7.4b
CDP Page 30 of 55 (C-AC7.4b/C-FB7.4b/C-PF7.4b) Report the Scope 1 emissions pertaining to your business activity(ies) and explain any exclusions. If applicable, disaggregate your agricultural/forestry by GHG emissions category.
Activity Processing/Manufacturing
Emissions category
Emissions (metric tons CO2e) 709692
Methodology Region-specific emissions factors
Please explain Only emissions from processing /manufacturing are relevant for our Scope 1. Region and, when available, country-specific emission factors were used to calculate these values.
C7.5
(C7.5) Break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions by country/region.
Country/Region Scope 2, location- Scope 2, market- Purchased and consumed Purchased and consumed low-carbon electricity, heat, based (metric tons based (metric tons electricity, heat, steam or steam or cooling accounted in market-based approach CO2e) CO2e) cooling (MWh) (MWh)
United States of 603219 603219 1099491 America
Canada 986 986 74069
Mexico 3029 3029 6680 Costa Rica 116 116 1806
Venezuela (Bolivarian 2679 2679 10048 Republic of)
Brazil 2082 2082
United Kingdom of 22014 24102 30617 Great Britain and Northern Ireland France 194 1188 3176
Spain 2557 3857 8788
Italy 3965 4287 9864 Poland 12490 13929 16013
Netherlands 5900 8397 14604
Russian Federation 9234 9234 21276 South Africa 9221 9221 7191
Egypt 2205 2205 4825
India 9676 9676 11304 Indonesia 13700 13700 18146
China 24229 24229 31714
New Zealand 9564 9564 50742 Australia 19857 19857 24128
C7.6
(C7.6) Indicate which gross global Scope 2 emissions breakdowns you are able to provide. By business division
CDP Page 31 of 55 C7.6a
(C7.6a) Break down your total gross global Scope 2 emissions by business division.
Business division Scope 2, location-based emissions (metric tons CO2e) Scope 2, market-based emissions (metric tons CO2e) U.S. Zone 603219 603219
Canadian Zone 986 986
Latin America (LATAM) Zone 7905 7905 EMEA (Europe-Middle-East-Africa) Zone 58547 67186
APAC (Asia Pacific) Zone 86261 86261
C7.9
(C7.9) How do your gross global emissions (Scope 1 and 2 combined) for the reporting year compare to those of the previous reporting year? Decreased
C7.9a
CDP Page 32 of 55 (C7.9a) Identify the reasons for any change in your gross global emissions (Scope 1 and 2 combined) and for each of them specify how your emissions compare to the previous year.
Change in Direction Emissions Please explain calculation emissions of change value (metric (percentage) tons CO2e)
Change in
Other 26817 Decreased 1.75 We estimate that 40% of our gross global emissions reductions achieved in 2017 are due to emission emissions reduction initiatives such as the implementation of energy optimization and other energy efficiency projects. reduction Emissions in 2017 were 67,043 MTs of CO2-eq less than in 2016. The emissions value was calculated by activities using 40% of the change in reduced emissions in 2017 (26,817 MT CO2-eq) and dividing that number by 1,533,653 MTs CO2-eq which were the total global gross emissions in 2016; and then multiplying by 100.
Divestment
Acquisitions
Mergers
Change in
Change in
Change in
Change in
Unidentified 40226 Decreased 2.62 We estimate that 60% of the total reduced global emissions achieved in 2017 are due to other factors that are not able to be fully identified . However, in 2017 we fully commercialized a number of manufacturing projects that involved investment to upgrade and modernize manufacturing assets and equipment at a number of key sites globally, we also consolidated a number of manufacturing assets, which likely helped us manage our overall energy utilization. The 2.62% reduction was calculated by dividing the change in emissions attributed to unidentified sources in 2017 (40,226 MTs CO2-eq) by the total number of gross global emissions in 2016: 1,533,653 MTs CO2-eq and multiplying by 100.
Other
C7.9b
(C7.9b) Are your emissions performance calculations in C7.9 and C7.9a based on a location-based Scope 2 emissions figure or a market-based Scope 2 emissions figure? Location-based
C8. Energy
C8.1
(C8.1) What percentage of your total operational spend in the reporting year was on energy? More than 0% but less than or equal to 5%
CDP Page 33 of 55 C8.2
(C8.2) Select which energy-related activities your organization has undertaken.
Indicate whether your organization undertakes this energy-related activity
Consumption of fuel (excluding feedstocks) Yes Consumption of purchased or acquired electricity Yes
Consumption of purchased or acquired heat Please select
Consumption of purchased or acquired steam Yes Consumption of purchased or acquired cooling Please select
Generation of electricity, heat, steam, or cooling Please select
C8.2a
(C8.2a) Report your organization’s energy consumption totals (excluding feedstocks) in MWh.
Heating value MWh from renewable MWh from non-renewable Total MWh sources sources
Consumption of fuel (excluding feedstock) HHV (higher heating 3019140 3019140 value)
Consumption of purchased or acquired electricity
Consumption of purchased or acquired cooling
Consumption of self-generated non-fuel renewable
Total energy consumption
C8.2b
(C8.2b) Select the applications of your organization’s consumption of fuel.
Indicate whether your organization undertakes this fuel application
Consumption of fuel for the generation of electricity Yes Consumption of fuel for the generation of steam Yes
Consumption of fuel for the generation of cooling Yes
Consumption of fuel for co-generation or tri-generation Yes
C8.2c
(C8.2c) State how much fuel in MWh your organization has consumed (excluding feedstocks) by fuel type.
Fuels (excluding feedstocks) Natural Gas
At this moment we are unable to break down the energy consumption by specific activity for this type of fuel.
Heating value HHV (higher heating value)
Total fuel MWh consumed by the organization
CDP Page 34 of 55 2013352
MWh fuel consumed for the self-generation of electricity
MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of heat
MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of steam
MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of cooling
MWh fuel consumed for self- cogeneration or self-trigeneration
Fuels (excluding feedstocks) Natural Gas
At this moment we are unable to break down the energy consumption by specific activity for this type of fuel.
Heating value LHV (lower heating value)
Total fuel MWh consumed by the organization 791735
MWh fuel consumed for the self-generation of electricity
MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of heat
MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of steam
MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of cooling
MWh fuel consumed for self- cogeneration or self-trigeneration
Fuels (excluding feedstocks) Coal
At this moment we are unable to break down the energy consumption by specific activity for this type of fuel.
Heating value LHV (lower heating value)
Total fuel MWh consumed by the organization 90701
MWh fuel consumed for the self-generation of electricity
MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of heat
MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of steam
MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of cooling
MWh fuel consumed for self- cogeneration or self-trigeneration
Fuels (excluding feedstocks) Crude Oil Light
At this moment we are unable to break down the energy consumption by specific activity for this type of fuel.
Heating value LHV (lower heating value)
Total fuel MWh consumed by the organization 85540
MWh fuel consumed for the self-generation of electricity
MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of heat
MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of steam
MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of cooling
CDP Page 35 of 55 MWh fuel consumed for self- cogeneration or self-trigeneration
Fuels (excluding feedstocks) Crude Oil Heavy
At this moment we are unable to break down the energy consumption by specific activity for this type of fuel.
Heating value LHV (lower heating value)
Total fuel MWh consumed by the organization 37812
MWh fuel consumed for the self-generation of electricity
MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of heat
MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of steam
MWh fuel consumed for self-generation of cooling
MWh fuel consumed for self- cogeneration or self-trigeneration
C8.2d
CDP Page 36 of 55 (C8.2d) List the average emission factors of the fuels reported in C8.2c.
Coal
Emission factor 2.66772
Unit metric tons CO2 per metric ton
Emission factor source WRI's Emission Factors from Cross Sector Tools March 2017 which lists the IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories as the source.
Comment
Crude Oil Heavy
Emission factor 3.10059
Unit metric tons CO2 per metric ton
Emission factor source WRI's Emission Factors from Cross Sector Tools March 2017 which lists the IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories as the source.
Comment
Crude Oil Light
Emission factor 3.10059
Unit metric tons CO2 per metric ton
Emission factor source WRI's Emission Factors from Cross Sector Tools March 2017 which lists the IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories as the source.
Comment
Natural Gas
Emission factor 0.20196
Unit metric tons CO2 per MWh
Emission factor source WRI's Emission Factors from Cross Sector Tools March 2017 which lists the IPCC 2006 Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories as the source.
Comment
C8.2f
(C8.2f) Provide details on the electricity, heat, steam and/or cooling amounts that were accounted for at a low-carbon emission factor in the market-based Scope 2 figure reported in C6.3.
C9. Additional metrics
CDP Page 37 of 55 C9.1
(C9.1) Provide any additional climate-related metrics relevant to your business.
Description Please select
Metric value
Metric numerator
Metric denominator (intensity metric only)
% change from previous year
Direction of change
Please explain
C10. Verification
C10.1
(C10.1) Indicate the verification/assurance status that applies to your reported emissions.
Verification/assurance status Scope 1 Third-party verification or assurance process in place
Scope 2 (location-based or market-based) Third-party verification or assurance process in place
Scope 3 Third-party verification or assurance process in place
C10.1a
(C10.1a) Provide further details of the verification/assurance undertaken for your Scope 1 and/or Scope 2 emissions and attach the relevant statements.
Scope Scope 1
Verification or assurance cycle in place Triennial process
Status in the current reporting year No verification or assurance of current reporting year
Type of verification or assurance Limited assurance
Attach the statement BVNA - CDP Verification Statement Limited._FINAL_Kraft Heinz.pdf
Page/ section reference Page 1. Due to the level of work involved in verification we have put in place an assurance process where we conduct assurance/verification of all our Scope 1 data (100%) every three years. Our last verification was performed in 2017 for data from 2016. We plan to again verify the data in 2020 for data from 2019. In the meantime, we have retained and followed all the processes for data gathering and emission calculations that were verified in 2017.
CDP Page 38 of 55 Relevant standard ISO14064-3
Proportion of reported emissions verified (%) 100
Scope Scope 2 location-based
Verification or assurance cycle in place Triennial process
Status in the current reporting year No verification or assurance of current reporting year
Type of verification or assurance Limited assurance
Attach the statement BVNA - CDP Verification Statement Limited._FINAL_Kraft Heinz.pdf
Page/ section reference Page 1. Due to the level of work involved in verification we have put in place an assurance process where we conduct assurance/verification of all our Scope 2 data (100%) every three years. Our last verification was performed in 2017 for data from 2016. We plan to again verify the data in 2020 for data from 2019. In the meantime, we have retained and followed all the processes for data gathering and emission calculations that were verified in 2017.
Relevant standard ISO14064-3
Proportion of reported emissions verified (%) 100
Scope Scope 2 market-based
Verification or assurance cycle in place Triennial process
Status in the current reporting year No verification or assurance of current reporting year
Type of verification or assurance Limited assurance
Attach the statement BVNA - CDP Verification Statement Limited._FINAL_Kraft Heinz.pdf
Page/ section reference Page 1. Due to the level of work involved in verification we have put in place an assurance process where we conduct assurance/verification of all our Scope 2 market based data (100%) every three years. We verified our 2016 data last year for our 2017 submission and will plan to again verify the data in 2020 or in 2019 if possible. In the mean time all the processes followed for data gathering and emission calculations in 2017 where followed in 2018 for 2017 data.
Relevant standard ISO14064-3
Proportion of reported emissions verified (%) 100
C10.1b
CDP Page 39 of 55 (C10.1b) Provide further details of the verification/assurance undertaken for your Scope 3 emissions and attach the relevant statements.
Scope Scope 3- all relevant categories
Verification or assurance cycle in place Biennial process
Status in the current reporting year No verification or assurance of current reporting year
Attach the statement Kraft Heinz Scope 3 Verification Statement June 16 2017.pdf
Page/section reference Page 2. We have put in place an assurance process where we conduct assurance/verification of all our Scope 3 data every two years. We verified our 2016 data last year for our 2017 submission and will plan to again verify the data in 2020 . In the mean time all the processes followed for data gathering and emission calculations modeling in 2017 where followed in 2018 for 2017 data.
Relevant standard ISO14064-3
C10.2
(C10.2) Do you verify any climate-related information reported in your CDP disclosure other than the emissions figures reported in C6.1, C6.3, and C6.5? No, we do not verify any other climate-related information reported in our CDP disclosure
C11. Carbon pricing
C11.1
(C11.1) Are any of your operations or activities regulated by a carbon pricing system (i.e. ETS, Cap & Trade or Carbon Tax)? Yes
C11.1a
(C11.1a) Select the carbon pricing regulation(s) which impacts your operations. EU ETS
C11.1b
CDP Page 40 of 55 (C11.1b) Complete the following table for each of the emissions trading systems in which you participate.
EU ETS
% of Scope 1 emissions covered by the ETS 5
Period start date January 1 2017
Period end date December 31 2017
Allowances allocated 45472
Allowances purchased 0
Verified emissions in metric tons CO2e 35746
Details of ownership Facilities we own and operate
Comment
C11.1d
(C11.1d) What is your strategy for complying with the systems in which you participate or anticipate participating?
We will continue to focus on energy/emission reduction and energy efficiency strategies at our manufacturing sites . Specifically, we are investing in metering and monitoring equipment, LED lighting, heat recovery, more efficient heat exchangers, steam optimization and electrical infrastructure. We will also leverage the purchasing of allowances as needed.
C11.2
(C11.2) Has your organization originated or purchased any project-based carbon credits within the reporting period? No
C11.3
(C11.3) Does your organization use an internal price on carbon? No, and we do not currently anticipate doing so in the next two years
C12. Engagement
C12.1
(C12.1) Do you engage with your value chain on climate-related issues? Yes, our suppliers
CDP Page 41 of 55 C12.1a
(C12.1a) Provide details of your climate-related supplier engagement strategy.
Type of engagement Engagement & incentivization (changing supplier behavior)
Details of engagement Other, please specify ( Good Agricultural Practices Program)
The Kraft Heinz Global Agriculture Program (GAP) is based on the principle of creating a long-term farm management philosophy that is equally focused on productivity, environmental stewardship and prosperity. When these best practices are properly implemented, growers can expect their farming operations to become economically, environmentally and socially sustainable. Our team of agriculture experts travels the globe as part of an extensive education initiative to share best practices and teach farmers how to grow tomatoes and other vegetables more efficiently and sustainably, providing not only significant health and environmental benefits, but also economic and social advancements.
% of suppliers by number 5
% total procurement spend (direct and indirect) 8
% Scope 3 emissions as reported in C6.5
Rationale for the coverage of your engagement We have initially focused our efforts on our direct growers and suppliers of tomatoes and other vegetables that are material to our business and brands. The Kraft Heinz Global Agriculture Program ensures key crops used in Kraft Heinz products are safe for consumers and helps suppliers and their farmers increase productivity. We ask our suppliers to implement Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) to help minimize the adverse effects of farming on the Earth’s natural resources and biodiversity.
Impact of engagement, including measures of success Results of the implementation of the GAP standards have lead to : Greater yields, increased organic matter percentage in soils, improved water retention, improved irrigation/decreased water use, reduced chemical use, minimized soil erosion, decreased energy, waste and pollution and increased worker safety. For example, members of the Kraft Heinz GAP invited a Brazilian farmer to Stockton, Calif.—site of a Kraft Heinz research farm where the Company’s proprietary tomato seed varieties are developed—to see firsthand how new equipment and irrigation practices could be used to improve the yields on his own farm. Before long, the farmer had gone from averaging 70 tons of tomatoes per hectare to a 110-ton average, with some fields exceeding 140 tons. In Extremadura, Spain—the Kraft Heinz GAP process helped a group of farmers double their tomato production over the past four growing seasons while also improving quality. As a result of this success, farmers in neighboring areas who grow a range of crops —not just tomatoes—have begun using these best practices, too.
Comment
C-AC12.2/C-FB12.2/C-PF12.2
(C-AC12.2/C-FB12.2/C-PF12.2) Do you encourage your suppliers to undertake any agricultural or forest management practices with climate change mitigation and/or adaptation benefits? Yes
C-AC12.2a/C-FB12.2a/C-PF12.2a
(C-AC12.2a/C-FB12.2a/C-PF12.2a) Specify which agricultural or forest management practices with climate change mitigation and/or adaptation benefits you encourage your suppliers to undertake and describe your role in the implementation of each practice.
Management practice reference number MP1
Management practice Seed variety selection
CDP Page 42 of 55 Description of management practice In 1970, the HeinzSeed Company was established to meet the challenge of creating tomato varieties that are adaptable to various global climates and best suited for processing. The now named KraftHeinzSeed program produces non-genetically modified hybrid tomato seeds for sustainable characteristics through traditional breeding techniques that help to ensure high quality, taste and nutrition when the tomato is harvested and processed. Our team has invested decades of research to develop hundreds of different commercial tomato varieties that: • Deliver superior taste, • Produce a higher yield, • Remain ripe longer, • Are more resistant to disease; and • Require less water. The program has bred tomatoes to be more disease resistant so tomato crops are less prone to blight, mold, viruses and bacterial diseases. Disease resistance also reduces the amount of pesticides used to help ensure healthy tomato plants, which keeps water supplies safer and production costs lower.
Your role in the implementation Financial Knowledge sharing Operational
Explanation of how you encourage implementation Implementation is encouraged by leveraging an extensive trialing program which validates yield benefits. Results achieved by other growers are also shared with the program participants. The strategy for monitoring Kraft Heinz GAP success is to give suppliers a simple self-assessment tool so they can measure progress against the key principles and key practices. This tool then allows leaders within the Kraft Heinz Global Agriculture Program to start a positive conversation about opportunities for improvement.
Climate change related benefit Emissions reductions (mitigation) Increasing resilience to climate change (adaptation) Reduced demand for pesticides (adaptation)
Comment
Management practice reference number MP2
Management practice Fertilizer management
Description of management practice These efforts are carried out through soil sampling, prescriptive fertilization at different stages of plant development, utilization of drip water to deliver nutrients. Utilizes cover crops during winter to encourage soil health, reduce run off and erosion.
Your role in the implementation Knowledge sharing Operational
Explanation of how you encourage implementation This work is part of our Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) program that suppliers of key raw materials are asked to follow/implement. Data that demonstrates the increase of yield and reduced costs associated with this work is shared with growers to foment participation. The strategy for monitoring Kraft Heinz GAP success is to give suppliers a simple self-assessment tool so they can measure progress against the four key principles and key practices. This tool then allows leaders within the Kraft Heinz Global Agriculture Program to start a positive conversation about opportunities for improvement.
Climate change related benefit Emissions reductions (mitigation) Increasing resilience to climate change (adaptation) Reduced demand for fertilizers (adaptation)
Comment
Management practice reference number MP3
Management practice Other, please specify (Water management)
Description of management practice Our water conservation techniques have included: • Developing hybrid tomato seeds, through natural selection, that require less water for each ton produced; • Evaluating pressurized systems that enable more efficient and accurate irrigation, compared to surface flood or furrow systems; • Analyzing water absorption rates, plant needs at each stage of growth and results of water testing tools, such as tension meters, soil probes and shovels, to observe moisture at plant root systems; • Designing systems that
CDP Page 43 of 55 eliminate water runoff and minimize evaporation; • Testing irrigation systems for water application uniformity and variations in flow and pressure; and • Developing procedures to regularly maintain and repair irrigation systems. Kraft Heinz has encouraged the adoption of drip irrigation in tomato growing because it delivers the precise amount of water the crop needs, when it needs it, where it needs it, and thus minimizes irrigation waste. Drip systems deliver water slowly and evenly to the root zone of each plant, and the grower can adjust rates according to changing crop needs. Alternatives such as overhead sprinkler or flooded furrow applications inevitably require more water be applied than the crops need to allow for losses from evaporation, surface runoff and leaching.
Your role in the implementation Knowledge sharing Operational
Explanation of how you encourage implementation This work is part of our Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) program that suppliers of key raw materials are asked to follow/implement. Data that demonstrates the impacts of the program are shared with other growers. The strategy for monitoring Kraft Heinz GAP success is to give suppliers a simple self-assessment tool so they can measure progress against the four key principles and key practices. This tool then allows leaders within the Kraft Heinz Global Agriculture Program to start a positive conversation about opportunities for improvement.
Climate change related benefit Increasing resilience to climate change (adaptation)
Comment
Management practice reference number MP4
Management practice Low tillage and residue management
Description of management practice Use of permanent beds that leverage GPS and drip irrigation.
Your role in the implementation Knowledge sharing Operational
Explanation of how you encourage implementation Implementation is encouraged by sharing data that shows less operational costs and improved productivity. The strategy for monitoring Kraft Heinz GAP success is to give suppliers a simple self-assessment tool so they can measure progress against the four key principles and key practices. This tool then allows leaders within the Kraft Heinz Global Agriculture Program to start a positive conversation about opportunities for improvement.
Climate change related benefit Increasing resilience to climate change (adaptation)
Comment
C-AC12.2b/C-FB12.2b/C-PF12.2b
(C-AC12.2b/C-FB12.2b/C-PF12.2b) Do you collect information from your suppliers about the outcomes of any implemented agricultural/forest management practices you have encouraged? Yes
C12.3
(C12.3) Do you engage in activities that could either directly or indirectly influence public policy on climate-related issues through any of the following? Trade associations
CDP Page 44 of 55 C12.3b
(C12.3b) Are you on the board of any trade associations or do you provide funding beyond membership? Yes
C12.3c
(C12.3c) Enter the details of those trade associations that are likely to take a position on climate change legislation.
Trade association International Dairy Foods Association
Is your position on climate change consistent with theirs? Consistent
Please explain the trade association’s position Please refer to: https://www.idfa.org/key-issues/environment-sustainability
How have you, or are you attempting to, influence the position? We support the approach and focus established by IDFA to reduce the carbon footprint in milk production's value chain. We have not engaged to influence the position.
Trade association American Beverage Association
Is your position on climate change consistent with theirs? Consistent
Please explain the trade association’s position Please refer to: http://www.ameribev.org/initiatives-advocacy/creating-sustainable-solutions/ http://innovationnaturally.org/
How have you, or are you attempting to, influence the position? We support the approach and focus established by ABA.We have not engaged to influence the position.
C12.3f
(C12.3f) What processes do you have in place to ensure that all of your direct and indirect activities that influence policy are consistent with your overall climate change strategy?
Our Corporate and Government Affairs team is responsible for managing the Kraft Heinz relationship external groups that we may be part of that may be able to influence climate related policy. This team maintains close communication with our global corporate social responsibility team to align on our strategies and policies around climate related issues and communicate those to the organizations we belong to to ensure alignment.
C12.4
CDP Page 45 of 55 (C12.4) Have you published information about your organization’s response to climate change and GHG emissions performance for this reporting year in places other than in your CDP response? If so, please attach the publication(s).
Publication In voluntary sustainability report
Status Complete
Attach the document KHC_CSR_2017_Overview.pdf
Content elements Governance Emissions figures Emission targets Other metrics
C13. Other land management impacts
C-AC13.2/C-FB13.2/C-PF13.2
(C-AC13.2/C-FB13.2/C-PF13.2) Do you know if any of the management practices mentioned in C-AC12.2a/C-FB12.2a/C- PF12.2a that were implemented by your suppliers have other impacts besides climate change mitigation/adaptation? Yes
C-AC13.2a/C-FB13.2a/C-PF13.2a
CDP Page 46 of 55 (C-AC13.2a/C-FB13.2a/C-PF13.2a) Provide details of those management practices implemented by your suppliers that have other impacts besides climate change mitigation/adaptation.
Management practice reference number MP1
Overall effect Positive
Which of the following has been impacted? Soil Water Yield
Description of impacts The different commercial tomato seed varieties developed by our KraftHeinz Seed program deliver the following: • superior taste, • higher yields • fruit that remains ripe longer, • fruit that is more resistant to disease; and • require less water. The program has bred tomatoes to be more disease resistant so tomato crops are less prone to blight, mold, viruses and bacterial diseases. Disease resistance also reduces the amount of pesticides used to help ensure healthy tomato plants, which keeps water supplies safer and production costs lower.
Have any response to these impacts been implemented? Yes
Description of the response(s) Suppliers and growers are very eager to continue participation, and often expanding, the program once they see the results.
Management practice reference number MP2
Overall effect Positive
Which of the following has been impacted? Water
Description of impacts By effectively managing the application of fertilizer the amounts used are optimized which translates to financial savings for the grower due to lower required inputs and positive environmental impact by reducing fertilizer runoff that can pollute water bodies.
Have any response to these impacts been implemented? Yes
Description of the response(s)
C14. Signoff
C-FI
(C-FI) Use this field to provide any additional information or context that you feel is relevant to your organization's response. Please note that this field is optional and is not scored.
C14.1
(C14.1) Provide details for the person that has signed off (approved) your CDP climate change response.
Job title Corresponding job category Row 1 Head of Operational Risk Management and Sustainability Other, please specify (Director ORM and Sustainability)
CDP Page 47 of 55 SC. Supply chain module
SC0.0
(SC0.0) If you would like to do so, please provide a separate introduction to this module.
SC0.1
(SC0.1) What is your company’s annual revenue for the stated reporting period?
Annual Revenue
Row 1 26085000000
SC0.2
(SC0.2) Do you have an ISIN for your company that you would be willing to share with CDP? No
SC1.1
(SC1.1) Allocate your emissions to your customers listed below according to the goods or services you have sold them in this reporting period.
Requesting member Target Corporation
Scope of emissions Scope 1
Emissions in metric tonnes of CO2e 7311.94
Uncertainty (±%) 15
Major sources of emissions Fuel usage (mainly natural gas) for energy generation
Verified No
Allocation method Allocation based on mass of products purchased
Please explain how you have identified the GHG source, including major limitations to this process and assumptions made We looked at the manufacturing sites that make the products sold to Target and identified the type of fuels used at these.
Requesting member Target Corporation
Scope of emissions
CDP Page 48 of 55 Scope 2
Emissions in metric tonnes of CO2e 10798.34
Uncertainty (±%) 15
Major sources of emissions Electricity usage
Verified No
Allocation method Allocation based on mass of products purchased
Please explain how you have identified the GHG source, including major limitations to this process and assumptions made We looked at the manufacturing sites that make the products sold to Target and identified the type of Scope 2 energy sources used at these. Location based Scope 2 emissions were allocated.
Requesting member Restaurant Brands International
Scope of emissions Scope 1
Emissions in metric tonnes of CO2e 4781.08
Uncertainty (±%) 15
Major sources of emissions Fuel usage (mainly natural gas) for energy generation
Verified No
Allocation method Allocation based on mass of products purchased
Please explain how you have identified the GHG source, including major limitations to this process and assumptions made We looked at the manufacturing sites that make the products sold to RBI and identified the type of Scope 1 fuels used at these.
Requesting member Restaurant Brands International
Scope of emissions Scope 2
Emissions in metric tonnes of CO2e 5103.4
Uncertainty (±%) 15
Major sources of emissions Electricity usage
Verified No
Allocation method Allocation based on mass of products purchased
Please explain how you have identified the GHG source, including major limitations to this process and assumptions made
CDP Page 49 of 55 We looked at the manufacturing sites that make the products sold to RBI and identified the type of Scope 2 energy sources used at these. Location based Scope 2 emissions were allocated.
Requesting member Caesars Entertainment
Scope of emissions Scope 1
Emissions in metric tonnes of CO2e 66.71
Uncertainty (±%) 15
Major sources of emissions Fuel usage (mainly natural gas) for energy generation
Verified No
Allocation method Allocation based on mass of products purchased
Please explain how you have identified the GHG source, including major limitations to this process and assumptions made We looked at the manufacturing sites that make the products sold to Caesar's Entertainment and identified the type of Scope 1 fuels used at these.
Requesting member Caesars Entertainment
Scope of emissions Scope 2
Emissions in metric tonnes of CO2e 105.17
Uncertainty (±%) 15
Major sources of emissions Electricity usage
Verified No
Allocation method Allocation based on mass of products purchased
Please explain how you have identified the GHG source, including major limitations to this process and assumptions made We looked at the manufacturing sites that make the products sold to Caesar's Entertainment and identified the type of Scope 2 energy sources used at these. Location based Scope 2 emissions were allocated.
Requesting member Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Scope of emissions Scope 1
Emissions in metric tonnes of CO2e 75988.95
Uncertainty (±%) 15
Major sources of emissions Fuel usage (mainly natural gas, along with some usage of both light and heavy oils and LPG ) for energy generation.
CDP Page 50 of 55 Verified No
Allocation method Allocation based on mass of products purchased
Please explain how you have identified the GHG source, including major limitations to this process and assumptions made We looked at the manufacturing sites that make the products sold to Walmart Stores and identified the type of Scope 1 fuels used at these.
Requesting member Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Scope of emissions Scope 2
Emissions in metric tonnes of CO2e 112221.22
Uncertainty (±%) 15
Major sources of emissions Electricity usage
Verified No
Allocation method Allocation based on mass of products purchased
Please explain how you have identified the GHG source, including major limitations to this process and assumptions made We looked at the manufacturing sites that make the products sold to Walmart Stores and identified the type of Scope 2 energy sources used at these. Location based Scope 2 emissions were allocated.
Requesting member Tesco
Scope of emissions Scope 1
Emissions in metric tonnes of CO2e 7853.63
Uncertainty (±%) 15
Major sources of emissions Fuel usage (mainly natural gas, along with some usage of both light oil ) for energy generation.
Verified No
Allocation method Allocation based on mass of products purchased
Please explain how you have identified the GHG source, including major limitations to this process and assumptions made We looked at the manufacturing sites that make the products sold to Tesco and identified the type of Scope 1 fuels used at these.
Requesting member Tesco
Scope of emissions Scope 2
Emissions in metric tonnes of CO2e
CDP Page 51 of 55 5660.46
Uncertainty (±%) 15
Major sources of emissions Electricity usage
Verified No
Allocation method Allocation based on mass of products purchased
Please explain how you have identified the GHG source, including major limitations to this process and assumptions made We looked at the manufacturing sites that make the products sold to Tesco and identified the type of Scope 2 energy sources used at these. Location based Scope 2 emissions were allocated.
Requesting member Wal Mart de Mexico
Scope of emissions Scope 1
Emissions in metric tonnes of CO2e 458.73
Uncertainty (±%) 15
Major sources of emissions Fuel usage (mainly natural gas, along with some usage of both light oil ) for energy generation.
Verified No
Allocation method Allocation based on mass of products purchased
Please explain how you have identified the GHG source, including major limitations to this process and assumptions made We looked at the manufacturing sites that make the products sold to Walmart de Mexico and identified the type of Scope 1 fuels used at these.
Requesting member Wal Mart de Mexico
Scope of emissions Scope 2
Emissions in metric tonnes of CO2e 811.87
Uncertainty (±%) 15
Major sources of emissions Electricity
Verified No
Allocation method Allocation based on mass of products purchased
Please explain how you have identified the GHG source, including major limitations to this process and assumptions made We looked at the manufacturing sites that make the products sold to Walmart de Mexico and identified the type of Scope 2 energy sources used at these. Location based Scope 2 emissions were allocated.
CDP Page 52 of 55 Requesting member Kellogg Company
Scope of emissions Scope 1
Emissions in metric tonnes of CO2e 279.48
Uncertainty (±%) 15
Major sources of emissions Fuel usage (mainly natural gas) for energy generation.
Verified No
Allocation method Allocation based on mass of products purchased
Please explain how you have identified the GHG source, including major limitations to this process and assumptions made We looked at the manufacturing site that make the products sold to Kellogg Company and identified the type of Scope 1 fuels used.
Requesting member Kellogg Company
Scope of emissions Scope 2
Emissions in metric tonnes of CO2e 437.56
Uncertainty (±%) 15
Major sources of emissions Electricity
Verified No
Allocation method Allocation based on mass of products purchased
Please explain how you have identified the GHG source, including major limitations to this process and assumptions made We looked at the manufacturing site that make the products sold to Kellogg Company and identified the type of Scope 2 energy sources used. Location based Scope 2 emissions were allocated.
SC1.2
(SC1.2) Where published information has been used in completing SC1.1, please provide a reference(s).
SC1.3
CDP Page 53 of 55 (SC1.3) What are the challenges in allocating emissions to different customers, and what would help you to overcome these challenges?
Allocation challenges Please explain what would help you overcome these challenges We face no challenges At this time we are able to manage requests from customers on GHG emissions by utilizing mass allocation.
SC1.4
(SC1.4) Do you plan to develop your capabilities to allocate emissions to your customers in the future? No
SC1.4b
(SC1.4b) Explain why you do not plan to develop capabilities to allocate emissions to your customers.
At this time the number of requests is manageable and we are able to allocate the emissions to our customers.
SC2.1
(SC2.1) Please propose any mutually beneficial climate-related projects you could collaborate on with specific CDP Supply Chain members.
SC2.2
(SC2.2) Have requests or initiatives by CDP Supply Chain members prompted your organization to take organizational-level emissions reduction initiatives? No
SC3.1
(SC3.1) Do you want to enroll in the 2018-2019 CDP Action Exchange initiative? No
SC3.2
(SC3.2) Is your company a participating supplier in CDP’s 2017-2018 Action Exchange initiative? No
SC4.1
(SC4.1) Are you providing product level data for your organization’s goods or services, if so, what functionality will you be using? No, I am not providing data
CDP Page 54 of 55 SC4.2d
(SC4.2d) Have any of the initiatives described in SC4.2c been driven by requesting CDP Supply Chain members? No
Submit your response
In which language are you submitting your response? English
Please confirm how your response should be handled by CDP
Public or Non-Public Submission I am submitting to Are you ready to submit the additional Supply Chain Questions? I am submitting my response Public Investors Yes, submit Supply Chain Questions now Customers
Please confirm below I have read and accept the applicable Terms
CDP Page 55 of 55