GHG Emissions

Ball has reported Scope 1 and 2 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions since 2002 and added Scope 3 emissions to the reporting portfolio in 2014:
  • Scope 1 emissions are direct GHG emissions from sources owned or controlled by Ball, and primarily include emissions from fossil fuels, such as natural gas and diesel, burned on site.
  • Scope 2 emissions are indirect GHG emissions from the generation of electricity, heating, cooling and steam generated off site and purchased by Ball.
  • Scope 3 emissions include indirect GHG emissions from sources not owned or directly controlled by Ball, but related to our activities. Examples include emissions related to the products and services we purchase and employee commuting.

Since 2007, we have disclosed our GHG emissions annually through CDP (formerly the Carbon Disclosure Project). Today, we submit information to three of CDP’s programs: climate change, supply chain and water. A high level of transparency of our sustainability performance, including corporate and product carbon footprints, in particular, is important to ensure our customers understand our sustainability commitments and how we contribute to their targets.

Our management and reporting systems, including internal audits, ensure the accuracy and reliability of our environmental information. We appointed PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC) to provide independent assurance of Ball’s 2015 GHG emission inventory. Part of PwC’s scope of work was to provide limited assurance of Ball’s Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions in line with the Greenhouse Gas Protocol.


In 2015, Ball’s operations emitted 1.23 million metric tons of GHG emissions (Scope 1 and 2), about 7 percent less than in 2010. Sixty-nine percent of our GHG emissions resulted from our electricity consumption, and 27 percent came from stationary combustion. To reduce our GHG emissions, Ball continues to increase energy efficiency and investigates options to use more onsite renewable energy.

At year-end 2015, we reached the end of our 2010-2015 GHG reduction commitment (Scope 1 and 2). Our goal was to improve our GHG emission intensity, which is calculated based on division-specific normalization factors, by 10 percent by 2015 (compared to a 2010 baseline). At the end, we hit our target and achieved a 10.4 percent improvement.
GHG Reduction Infographic
By 2018, we will launch a science-based greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction target consistent with the level of decarbonization required to limit global warming to less than 2 degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial temperatures. Before we announce a target, we want to ensure we fully understand the GHG impacts of our evolving organization. Until our science-based GHG reduction target is released, we will continue to invest in, implement and report on our GHG emission reduction efforts.


We align our Scope 3 emissions reporting with the “Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard” published by the World Resource Institute (WRI) and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD). Accordingly, we evaluated GHG emissions from 15 categories covering upstream emissions, like those from our suppliers, and downstream emissions, such as those from our customers.

Our 2015 Scope 3 emissions include the following categories: "purchased goods and services" (96 percent of our quantified Scope 3 emissions), "waste generated in our operations" (0.1 percent), "business travel" (0.1 percent), and "downstream transportation and distribution" (3.7 percent). More than 90 percent of our Scope 3 emissions originate from metal production. We continue working toward quantifying other categories of Scope 3 emissions, such as employee commuting, and upstream logistics.

With better data on our Scope 3 emissions, we can effectively identify relevant risks and opportunities associated with emissions from our value chain, develop reduction plans and engage value chain partners in GHG management.
Investor Perspective

"I believe that tracking and reporting supply chain GHG statistics would further differentiate Ball from competitors and competing substrates when explaining their value proposition to customers, retailers and consumers who are all placing increased emphasis on sustainability."

As an investor who recognizes that a coherent sustainability strategy is critical to success in the packaged good space, I am impressed with the emphasis that Ball places on sustainability throughout their organization. I feel that not only responsibility bestowed at the board and C-suite level by the Sustainability Steering Committee, but also monetary incentives available to all employees to reduce CO2 emissions, are key to Ball’s progress in tackling these issues. Ball’s effort to reduce GHG emissions by 10 percent over a 5 year period will not only help the environment, it will reduce Ball’s input costs.

It is encouraging that as of their last CDP submission, Ball is 48.5 percent of the way toward their 5 year goal after only 2 years. However, I feel that Ball could improve further by tracking and publicly reporting all forms of emissions, including Scope 3, which includes emissions by Ball’s supply chain.

As an investor I recognize the inherent advantages of the can in shipping, the fact that nearly 70 percent of all cans are recycled on a global basis (the largest of any packaging substrate), and Ball’s efforts to lightweight cans save not only GHG emissions, but reduce the cost of the can which saves customers and consumers money. I believe that tracking and reporting supply chain GHG statistics would further differentiate Ball from competitors and competing substrates when explaining their value proposition to customers, retailers and consumers, who are all placing increased emphasis on sustainability.

- Brian Demain, CFA, Portfolio Manager, Janus Capital Group Inc.
Brian Demain Image