Keller sustainability score: 30/100
Better than 20% of Construction / Real Estate
Below expectations starts at 31. The highest score on SINK is 71.
Keller is a London-listed geotechnical specialist contractor, providing ground improvement, piling and other foundation work through three geographical divisions. It reported £3,087.3 million of revenue for 2025, with about 9,860 employees.
Founded 1989Head office London, United KingdomStaff ~9,864 (2025)Revenue £3,087.3 million revenue (FY ended 31 Dec 2025; 2024: £2,986.7m)Website ↗
Keller reports verified Scope 1 and 2 emissions and, for the first time, a spend-based Scope 3 estimate, but its Scope 1 and Scope 3 both rose in 2025. Its net-zero targets cover Scope 2 by 2030 and Scope 1 by 2040, but only a narrow 'operational' part of Scope 3, and are not SBTi-validated. In 2023 its Canadian subsidiary Keller Foundations Ltd pleaded guilty and was ordered to pay CAD 1 million after concrete leachate from its work killed about 85 trout in a British Columbia creek.
Keller scores 30/100 (Significant gaps) on SINK's independent climate assessment, scored from public data only. Scores are free. Nobody can pay to change a score, speed it up or hide it. Last verified November 2026.
That places Keller joint 757th of 1,055 companies scored, and joint 37th of 47 in Construction / Real Estate.
What is Keller doing well, and where does it fall short?
Strongest on Carbon Footprint: Operations and Transparency & Accountability (7/10, 7/10). Weakest on Emissions Trajectory and Water Impact (1/10, 1/10).
Where Keller lost points
For each question that lost points, the evidence our public rubric looks for that we didn't find.
What would raise this score
- Whether its emissions are fallingShow its emissions are falling.
- Its effect on waterPublish figures for its water use.
- Its effect on natureAssess its effect on nature and publish a basic environmental policy.
Every question that lost points
- Emissions from its own operations7/10Its own emissions aren't independently verified or tracked over several years.
- Emissions from its supply chain5/10Most of its supply-chain (Scope 3) emissions aren't measured.
- Whether its emissions are falling1/10No evidence its emissions are falling.
- How clean its energy is3/10No renewable energy tariff or major efficiency investment shown.
- Its effect on nature2/10No assessment of its effect on nature, and no basic environmental policy.
- How it uses materials and handles waste3/10No active waste reduction, reuse or repair shown.
- Its effect on water1/10No figures for its water use.
- Its climate targets3/10No specific targets with dates.
- How openly it reports7/10No annual impact report, or no pay linked to climate targets.
- Its record on controversies5/10Points deducted for controversies or its business model. The finding is under question 10.
A score changes when the evidence does. We use new published evidence at the next rescore. Anyone can send us new evidence, free. How to send it.
How is Keller's SINK score calculated?
Same ten questions for every company. No private weighting.
SINK = (0.3 × Base + 0.7 × Performance) × ScaleHas Keller's score changed?
Keller's score has been reviewed 2 times and currently stands where it started, at 30.
- 30 → 3010 November 2026
Initial public score 30 (publish-draft)
- Scored 3010 November 2026
Initial public score 30 (publish-draft)
What evidence is Keller's score based on?
10 sources used in this assessment. All publicly available. Each row shows which of the ten questions it informed.
60% of them were published by Keller itself; the rest come from independent sources.
Keller prints its 2025 Scope 1 (218,736 tCO2e), market-based Scope 2 (2,652 tCO2e) and estimated Scope 3 (3,317,709 tCO2e) separately; the total shown is their sum.
“Scope 1 tonnes CO2e 218,736 200,396 198,289”
“Scope 1 and 2 emissions are third-party verified to ISO 14064-3, SECR and the GHG Protocol.”
“Monitoring the progress of the Taskforce on Nature-based Financial Disclosures (TNFD)”
“Working towards disclosing water use through CSRD and wider sustainability reporting.”
“Our target continues to be net zero on Scope 2 emissions by 2030, net zero”
“Keller Foundations Ltd.’s construction activities led to a discharge of concrete leachate into groundwater that flowed into Larson Creek.”
“Keller's construction activities led to a discharge of concrete leachate into groundwater that flowed into Larson Creek in West Vancouver.”
“Keller Canada (formerly the piling division of North American Construction Group) was bought by U.K.-based Keller Group Plc. (Keller), in July 2013”
“Ryton has switched to certified green energy tariffs, which means all electricity comes from renewable sources.”
“we look to reduce raw material use, increase our use of secondary materials, reduce waste to landfill and allow for pile reuse.”
If you believe a source has been misread or a newer version exists, submit a challenge.
Is this your company? Claim this profile (free)
Use this score in tenders
Send the link, or the one-page score sheet. It links back to this page and every source. Free.
Open the score sheet →Send new evidence, free
Scored low because little is published? Publish what you do and send us the link, free. If it holds up, your score changes, and the change is logged on your page.
How to send evidence →Put your score on your website, free
It shows the current band, sector rank and score, and links to this page, so it changes when the score does.
Track this score
Bidding for a public contract? Check if you need a Carbon Reduction Plan, free →
Want your own page like this?
Free, independent, every source shown. Send it to any buyer who asks about your sustainability.
How does Keller compare with other construction / real estate companies?
Where Keller sits among construction / real estate peers.
Among the 47 major construction / real estate brands we've scored, Keller is tied =37th of 47, with 1 other.
Who scores higher in Construction / Real Estate?
The 3 companies in the sector scoring nearest above Keller.
The Crown Estate reports rising absolute emissions driven by offshore wind construction on leased seabed, with Scope 3 up 60% year-on-year.
See the breakdown →Galliford Try reports verified Scope 1+2 emissions but full Scope 3 remains unquantified, with materials-related emissions (95% of footprint) tracked only via unverified spend-based estimates.
See the breakdown →Karma Kitchen operates six-to-eight London dark kitchen sites with a small 27-person team.
See the breakdown →Which companies moved this week, and why.
One email, every Sunday. Score changes, new research, the stories behind the numbers. Free.
We'll send one email to confirm. No spam. Unsubscribe in one click.
Checking a company?
Search free →Asked to prove you're sustainable?
Get your business scored, free →Been scored?
Find your page and claim it, free →Scores are free. Nobody can pay to change a score, speed it up or hide it.