Life Cycle Assessment
A Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a standardized method used to evaluate the environmental impacts of a product, package, or system across its entire life cycle. This includes everything from raw material extraction through manufacturing, transportation, use, and end-of-life. LCAs help organizations understand where environmental impacts occur and identify opportunities for improvement. Trayak’s EcoImpact Sustainability Platform makes creating LCA reports simple.
The only data points needed to conduct an LCA with EcoImpact-COMPASS are material and mass; however, you have the ability to add in much more granular data. This includes, but is not limited to, manufacturing processes, renewable energy inputs, reusability rates, post-consumer recycled (PCR) material content, end-of-life recycling distribution, sales quantities, secondary and tertiary packaging information, and packaging type.
The phases in a life cycle assessment are: Material, Manufacturing, Transportation, Use, and End-Of-Life. For more information on each of these life cycle phases, check out our Why LCA page.
Trayak supports an assortment of industries including: Packaging, Medical Devices, Food & Beverage, Appliances & Machinery, Apparel & Footwear, Cosmetics & Personal Care, Electronics & Computing Devices, Homecare & Cleaning Supplies.
Trayak’s® AI architecture has guardrails in place to avoid harmful bias. Trayak’s® AI is designed to filter out malicious or harmful content and personally identifiable information (PII) in its inputs and outputs.
EcoImpact-COMPASS’s data is regionalized by 9 different regions: United States, Canada, China, Europe, Mexico, South America (Brazil), India, Australia, Japan, and Southeast Asia.
This depends on the methodology used. For the COMPASS methodology, there are 8 indicators: Fossil Fuel Use, Global Warming Potential (GWP), Water Consumption (with Scarcity), Freshwater Eutrophication, Mineral Resource Use, GWP with CO2 Uptake, Freshwater Ecotoxicity, and Human Health. Whereas, for the Environmental Footprint (EF) Method, there are 16 indicators.
Scope 1, 2, and 3
Trayak follows the GHG Protocol’s methodology and sources emissions factors from the GHG Protocol, EPA, and life cycle inventory databases such as ecoinvent.
The first year that reporting is required is 2024 (reporting in 2025). Depending on the size of your business, you may need to begin reporting Scope 3 emissions between 2025 and 2029.
For Europe, companies can report Scope 1 and 2 in the first year, with Scope 3 added the next year of reporting. It is unclear if all countries will follow the same approach.
Trayak’s Scope solution covers all Scope 3 categories.
Product Carbon Footprints
A PCF is a simpler focused analysis that looks only at carbon-related impacts (typically greenhouse gas emissions). While it uses the same foundational data collection (ISO 14040/14044 and Life Cycle Inventory), its narrow scope makes it less complex and lower cost. PCFs can follow several different standards or methodologies (e.g., ISO 14067, PAS 2050, and GHG Protocol). An LCA is a more comprehensive analysis that evaluates multiple environmental indicators like carbon emissions, fossil fuel use, human impact, and water consumption across a product’s life cycle. Because of this wider scope, an LCA is more complex, and typically costs more.
PCFs provide visibility into where emissions occur across the supply chain, enabling more informed, data-driven decisions. They can support:
- Supplier selection: comparing suppliers based on carbon intensity to select the lower-emission options.
- Material choice: identifying alternative materials with a lower carbon impact.
- Transportation strategies: evaluating which transportation modes and routes to produce the lowest emissions.
Collecting primary data when possible, using verified LCI databases like EcoInvent for secondary data, and conducting a Third-Party Verification will ensure accuracy.
This depends on the audience and the goal. Often PCFs are more popular for corporate reporting, supply chain engagement, and carbon reduction goals while LCAs are more popular in product development, comparative environmental claims, and broader sustainability strategies. PCFs are more widely used and easier to communicate, while LCAs are deeper and broader studies.
Ideally, annually; however, if there is a major change in materials, suppliers, manufacturing processes, or transportation methods, another PCF should be conducted to adjust for this change.
This depends on the audience and the goal. Often PCFs are more popular for corporate reporting, supply chain engagement, and carbon reduction goals while LCAs are more popular in product development, comparative environmental claims, and broader sustainability strategies. PCFs are more widely used and easier to communicate, while LCAs are deeper and broader studies.
If full supply chain data is not fully available, we will use secondary datasets like EcoInvent for industry average data. We suggest using conservative assumptions and documenting your sources and assumptions to maintain transparency.
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR)
Expended producer responsibility is a policy approach that shifts the responsibility of end-of-life management from consumers to the producer of the product or package. Such programs often include annual fees for producers that are used to support improvement of recycling infrastructure, development of public education programs, as well as the implementation of financial incentives to drive producer impact reduction, called eco-modulation.
EPR is currently being administered on a state-by-state basis, and is yet unlikely to be implemented through federal regulations. However, most states with EPR programs have selected the Circular Action Alliance (CAA) as their Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO) and reporting deadlines have been synchronized to reduce administrative burdens for producers that are obligated in multiple states.
Currently, EPR programs in the US require producers to submit annual data for the weights of materials supplied into the applicable state by reporting category. Depending on the state, supplemental information may also be required to support application for eco-modulation incentives.
Eco-modulation: Oregon (EPR)
Oregon’s eco-modulation approach uses Life Cycle Assessments (LCAs) to evaluate and disclose producer impact assessments, as well as track impact reduction as a result of implementing packaging design changes. There are 3 different LCA-based bonuses: Bonus A, Bonus B, and Bonus C.
- Bonus A: This bonus is awarded to producers for simply disclosing an LCA report that follows the Oregon LCE guidelines. This bonus is calculated as 10% of a producer’s relevant base fees, capped at $20,000 per LCA.
- Bonuses B and C: These bonuses are designed to reward producers for going a step beyond LCA disclosure and making packaging changes that have a measurable reduction in impact.
- Bonus B is awarded to producers that demonstrate a substantial reduction of at least 10% in impact as a result of implementing a packaging change.
- Bonus C is awarded to producers who transition a single-use package to a reusable or refillable format.
- Bonuses B and C are calculated by applying a tiered multiplier to 10% of the relevant base fees, and are capped at $50,000 per LCA.
- Tier 1: Impact reduction of 10 – 40%. Multiplier = 2.0
- Tier 2: Impact reduction of 40 – 70%. Multiplier = 2.25
- Tier 3: Impact reduction of >70%. Multiplier = 2.5
- SKUs may be batched together if they are from the same product/category and:
- 1. Have the same material composition; and
- 2. Come from a similar or the same supply chain.
- According to the Oregon DEQ, it can be reasonably assumed that LCAs for a batch of SKUs would be identical or proportionate to the sizes of the packaging format.
- Examples:
- 10 SKUs of the same box with different printed branding for different holidays
- 10 SKUs of a lotion bottle that has the same design but comes in different sizes (8 oz, 10 oz, 16 oz, etc.)
In order to qualify for an Oregon eco-modulation bonus, producer LCAs must adhere to all LCE guidelines and must not be started more than 1 year prior to the submission deadline, so it is unlikely that an existing LCA would meet all requirements. However, producers could use bonus LCAs outside of the Oregon EPR program, as the assessment would be comprehensive and third-party reviewed.
The Oregon DEQ has provided a checklist of hazardous substances that can be used to make disclosures of whether the substance is intentionally-added or a contaminant at the relevant quantification limits.
A SKU or batch of SKUs is only eligible for Bonus A, B, or C every three years. Additionally, Top 25 producer LCAs are only eligible for Bonuses B or C, not Bonus A.
There’s no one definitive answer. The potential value of Bonuses B and C is dependent on a combination of the SKUs that are evaluated and the packaging changes that were implemented. Because the bonuses are based on a producer’s relevant base fees, a SKU or batch of SKUs with higher fees has the potential to generate a larger return. However, producers will also need to maximize their impact reduction in order to earn a higher multiplier.
For more information on how Trayak can help you maximize your Bonus B or C submission, contact us.
Trayak will help you identify SKUs that will maximize your bonus opportunities, create a spreadsheet of impact assessment results, write a confidential and public version of your supplemental report, and facilitate the critical review process with an independent reviewer.
Eco-modulation: Colorado (EPR)
Colorado’s eco-modulation approach utilizes 2 types of factors that can increase or reduce material fees: passive and active.
Passive eco-modulation factors are automatically applied to Colorado producer dues based on whether a material is easier or harder to recycle.
- Materials that disrupt recycling are subject to a 5% malus, or increase in fees.
- Materials on the Additional Material List (AML) have fees that are 20% higher than the average of similar Minimum Recyclable List (MRL) materials, and dues for Not Collected materials are 10% higher than the average of similar AML materials.
- Materials with higher recycling rates may be eligible for a 5% incentive, or decrease in fees.
Active eco-modulation factors require producers to submit supplemental information in order to qualify for a 5% reduction in dues for relevant SKUs or materials. There are currently 4 active eco-modulation factors in Colorado:
- Reduction: at least a 10% reduction in a SKU’s weight
- Enhancement: design or material change that increases a SKU’s recyclability
- PCR Content: post-consumer recycled content that exceeds Colorado material category thresholds
- Reuse/Refill: packaging that meets requirements for reuse or refill at home
Active eco-modulations are capped at $50,000 per producer per year, and the CAA has guaranteed that producers that apply for active eco-modulation in 2026 will receive a minimum of $5,000.
Third Party Review
An LCA is a comprehensive, third-party reviewed study conducted in accordance with ISO 14040/44 that evaluates multiple environmental impact categories across a product’s life cycle and is documented in a detailed technical report. An EPD is a report built from an LCA, which summarizes the results into a standardized format in alignment with ISO 14025 and utilizes a specific Product Category Rule (PCR). Verified EPDs are then published through an accredited program operator such as The International EPD System, EPDItaly, or UL Solutions. LCAs are long technical documents that provide context to the environmental results, whereas EPDs summarize the LCA into a consistent and digestible format. A PCF is narrower in scope and looks only at carbon-related impacts. While it relies on the same foundational data collection as an LCA (ISO 14040/14044), its simpler focus makes it less complex and lower cost. PCFs can follow several different standards or methodologies: e.g., ISO 14067, PAS 2050, and the GHG Protocol.
Yes, you can, though primary data is encouraged and is required for the weights/materials/etc. of the main models.
In general, an LCA or PCF report is valid until a significant change is made either in the model being considered or the data feeding the model. For EPDs, the report is valid for 5 years and for Oregon’s EPR eco-modulations, the report is good for 10 years.
As the project manager and LCA practitioner, Trayak organizes the panel and ensures everyone on the panel meets the necessary qualifications.
While all great for specific purposes, the IMPACT World+ and Environmental Footprint methods, both of which are available on the EcoImpact-COMPASS platform, are great methodologies for global materials and the different areas of concern for both packaging and products.
Data and Integration
Data integration means creating an information highway between your company’s internal data management systems and the EcoImpact Sustainability Platform. This ensures that your bill of materials information is up-to-date, accurate, and complete – which is important for creating comprehensive LCA reports.
There are two main kinds of data integrations that EcoImpact uses to connect to our customers. The first is a static integration, which is manually triggered on a certain cadence. For example, you might elect to refresh your data once a year for reporting purposes. This ensures that your users are never confused about what product data is loaded in EcoImpact. The other option is an automated integration. For fast-moving companies with more than one sustainability goal, automated integrations ensure that any new data in your spec management systems is automatically pushed to EcoImpact once a day, once a month, or once a year. Deciding between these two options depends on a company’s sustainability needs. Trayak is happy to help you determine what’s right for you.
Integration with EcoImpact is designed to be as simple and easy to use as possible. EcoImpact uses an established and proprietary data format called a “Sustainability BOM” to map a company’s data into our software. A Sustainability BOM is similar to a manufacturing BOM, planning BOM, or design BOM in structure – it is a specialized framework of information that is used for LCA. In other words, it records the necessary information for LCAs, and leaves extra information securely in the original system. The Sustainability BOM is compatible with common data formats like JSON and XML.
Trayak has completed dozens of integrations with our customers. We have a safe and established process for onboarding your IT team, building the integration, and maintaining its security long term. Please get in touch with us to learn more about implementing integrations.
EcoImpact is ISO 27001 certified. This is the highest level of security certification obtainable for software companies. We take the safety of your data very seriously. We also work closely with IT teams at our customer companies to implement and safeguard integrations whenever necessary. Get in touch with us to learn more.
This is more common than people might think! Trayak accommodates bulk uploading of data in spreadsheet format. XLS files can be imported into and exported out of EcoImpact with ease. EcoImpact can model your product sales information in multiple regions easily, and with Sustainability Intelligence, it’s even possible to visualize insights on easy to use dashboards. If you are interested in these features, talk to us about our AdvancedReporting package.
The short answer is yes, we do, with some commonly used CAD software. Please contact us to learn more about UI integrations.
Because of the complex nature of data integrations, it is not possible for Trayak to publish pricing information on our website. Pricing for integrations depends on the volume of data, frequency, number of systems to be combined, and how much data mapping is necessary. We would be happy to discuss these options in more detail on a call.
Water Footprint
According to ISO 14046, a water footprint is the “compilation and evaluation of the inputs, outputs and the potential environmental impacts related to water used or affected by a product, process or organization”.
There are 2 distinct types of water footprints: a water footprint that requires a qualifier and a comprehensive water footprint profile. A water footprint that requires a qualifier focuses on only one or a limited set of water-related indicators. For example, if your water footprint only uses a water scarcity indicator, then you would be creating a water scarcity footprint.
A comprehensive water footprint profile–which is what Trayak offers–utilizes a comprehensive set of indicators that address both water availability and water quality. Our approach incorporates 7 indicators, with 4 degradation indicators to track water quality, 1 scarcity indicator to account for availability, and 2 indicators to track water use and consumption, as well as satisfy the requirement for the inclusion of a water inventory.
This depends on the goal of your footprint and the indicators you choose to achieve it. At Trayak, we use 7 different indicators to fulfill the requirements of a comprehensive water footprint, which gives you a holistic view of your water-related impacts. From the Environmental Footprint method, we are using Water Use (scarcity), Freshwater Eutrophication, Marine Eutrophication, and Freshwater Ecotoxicity. From Impact World+ we have Thermal Pollution, and then we also include a water inventory, with Water Inventory Use and Water Inventory Consumption.
Some of the questions that these indicators can answer include:
- How much water is being used, and how much is used in the context of water availability in the relevant region?
- What are you doing to that water?
- What is happening to the quality of the water as a result?
Water footprints that follow ISO 14046 can be used to help standardize reporting, allowing you to report consistently and make those results comparable to other ISO-compliant water footprints, as well as help you fulfill water-related reporting requirements for ESG and CSRD.
Beyond required reporting, the water footprint method from ISO 14046 can be used to complete comprehensive evaluations of water-related impacts for internal decision making and hotspot identification, and a subsequent third party review can allow for those results to be published and used to make comparative assertions.
t a basic level, the Environmental Footprint method is a broader methodology consisting of 16 indicators, with consideration for carbon, water use, resource use, and degradation indicators for land as well as water. In contrast, PCF is a more comprehensive view of your carbon-related impact, breaking your total GWP value into those from fossil fuels, biogenic emissions, biogenic removals, land use, and aircraft.
Water footprint would be more similar to PCF, in that we narrow the focus down to water-related impacts only. But rather than breaking 1 indicator into subimpacts, we’ve compiled a group of in
Like any other LCA, this is going to depend on how you plan to use the results. If you’re running an analysis or comparison in order to make internal decisions, then yes, you can use the water footprint method in your COMPASS license like you would any other method.
However, if you want to publish these results, and especially if you want to make comparative claims, you will need a third party review. Trayak’s consulting team will guide you through this process – including the data collection, supplemental report creation, and official review — to ensure everything is credible and compliant.
Agentic AI
Trayak’s® agentic AI is backed by rigorous security standards to ensure your data stays your own.
Our software development lifecycle incorporates security and privacy straight from the design phase. Production deployment is continuously monitored, with the highest grade of malware detection software applicable to our technology. Our software architecture is designed to preserve the authenticity and integrity of all the data that we collect and reference, and it is designed with safeguards in place. AI cannot and does not directly modify any customer data without an explicit live input from a customer. This meticulous strategy ensures that we can preserve your information with the utmost privacy and security.
All development processes at Trayak® involve multiple layers of resiliency, including retrials and error handling. AI models trained by Trayak® have not been trained on customer data and Trayak’s® AI services do not use, transfer, or maintain customer data outside of a customer’s account. AI Chat histories may be used to improve answers to frequently asked questions. This information is maintained on a secure, private server and will not be shared.
Detailed user guides and citations provide documentation to users. However, AI answers may be incorrect or misleading and should always be verified.
Data collected for a specific purpose from a customer is not used for unrelated objectives like customer profiling or personalized marketing. If, in the future, Trayak® chooses to do so, we will obtain consent in a documented process, compliant with GDPR guidelines.
Trayak’s® AI architecture has guardrails in place to avoid harmful bias. Trayak’s® AI is designed to filter out malicious or harmful content and personally identifiable information (PII) in its inputs and outputs.
Trayak’s® AI services do not give AI models permission to modify or delete customer data. These guardrails ensure that customer data integrity is maintained. User data security is a top priority at Trayak® and we are committed to taking every possible precaution to prevent violation. Our data governance framework includes source verification and appropriate access controls to prevent data manipulation. Subject-specific chat bots are trained on official documentation from reputable sustainability and environmental regulation resources.
Trayak® has a regular data validation and model monitoring process in place to ensure the accuracy of algorithmic outputs. Regular updates and risk assessments are conducted quarterly to manage emerging risks and maintain compliance with organizational and regulatory standards. AI services cannot modify or delete customer data, so adverse consequences from algorithmic decisions are minimized.
Trayak® and our software is ISO 27001:2022 certified. We have upheld this standard without interruption since 2021.