Carbon Footprint — Operations: How does The Procter & Gamble Company score?

P&G reports FY23/24 total Scope 1+2 emissions of 2,152,000 metric tons (market-based), verified by LRQA, using GHG Protocol methodology. Multi-year granular breakdown by business unit is provided. The 60% absolute reduction versus 2010 baseline is verified and achieved without offsets. Strong operational data quality but absolute Scope 1 remains ~2M tonnes due to manufacturing intensity.

Carbon Footprint — Supply Chain: How does The Procter & Gamble Company score?

P&G reports ~98% of Scope 3 comes from 4 categories (purchased goods, upstream transport, use of sold products, end of life). Supply chain is ~10x operations (~20M+ tonnes upstream). However, P&G does not publish a consolidated total Scope 3 figure. The Gazette/Bloomberg estimated total value chain emissions at ~230M tonnes/year. Planet Tracker found P&G on a +3°C trajectory due to inadequate Scope 3 engagement. Scope 3 targets are intensity-based (per unit of production), not absolute — a signi

Emissions Trajectory: How does The Procter & Gamble Company score?

Scope 1+2 show strong absolute decline: 60% reduction vs 2010 baseline, exceeding SBTi validated near-term target. However, Scope 1+2 represent only ~1-2% of total footprint. Planet Tracker projected upstream Scope 3 emissions increasing 22.7% per year, putting P&G on a +3°C trajectory by 2030. Per SINK rules, Scope 3 rising while Scope 1+2 improve triggers a cap at 4.

Energy Source: How does The Procter & Gamble Company score?

P&G sources >99% renewable electricity globally as of FY24, with a target of 100% by 2030. RE100 member since 2015. Mix of PPAs (e.g., 126MW Tyler Bluff wind farm in Texas), on-site generation (biomass CHP in Georgia), and RECs. 100% renewable in US, Canada, and Western Europe since 2019. Some reliance on unbundled RECs in emerging markets caps the score below 10, but PPAs demonstrate additionality.

Nature & Biodiversity Impact: How does The Procter & Gamble Company score?

P&G faces severe nature/biodiversity criticism. NRDC, Stand.earth, and RAN have documented P&G's role in boreal forest degradation via Charmin/Bounty pulp sourcing. Five greenwashing class actions filed in May 2025 alleging deforestation. NRDC filed SEC complaint over misleading forest degradation claims. P&G quietly removed forest degradation prohibition from its policy in 2024. While P&G maintains 100% RSPO palm oil and FSC certification, NGOs and scientists dispute the adequacy. Forest 500 ra

Resource Use & Waste: How does The Procter & Gamble Company score?

P&G has maintained zero manufacturing waste to landfill since 2020 and reports 80% of consumer packaging designed to be recyclable or reusable with a 2030 target of 100%. Gillette eliminated ~4,680 metric tons of plastic globally via packaging transitions. P&G participates in circular economy initiatives and uses post-consumer recycled resin. However, the core business model (disposable diapers, single-use toilet paper, plastic packaging) remains fundamentally linear. Significant plastic waste f

Water Impact: How does The Procter & Gamble Company score?

P&G set 2030 water positive goals for 18 water-stressed manufacturing areas, developed in partnership with WRI. Water use efficiency up 26% per unit since 2010. 50L Home Coalition addresses consumer-use water (the majority of P&G's water footprint). Water restoration projects in California, Colorado River, and Utah. However, targets are predominantly intensity-based, and consumer use phase dominates the water footprint — an area where P&G has limited direct control. No full water cycle verificat

Targets & Commitments: How does The Procter & Gamble Company score?

SBTi validated near-term targets for Scope 1+2 (absolute 63% by FY2030 vs FY2015, 1.5°C aligned). However, net-zero commitment was REMOVED by SBTi in March 2024 for failing to submit validated net-zero targets within the deadline. P&G did not respond to Trellis inquiry about resubmission. Scope 3 targets are INTENSITY-based (40% per unit of production), not absolute — a significant weakness given revenue growth. Nature-based offsets used for residual Scope 1+2 during 2020-2030 decade. Net zero 2

Transparency & Accountability: How does The Procter & Gamble Company score?

P&G has a Chief Sustainability Officer, board-level oversight of climate through the Governance and Public Responsibility Committee, TCFD-aligned disclosure, annual Citizenship Report, ESG investor portal, and CDP Climate Change response. Scope 1+2 verified by LRQA. Executive compensation includes sustainability metrics via STAR program, though Planet Tracker noted minimal influence on long-term ambition. However, Church of England Pensions Board voted against P&G management for failure to produ

Controversies & Red Flags: How does The Procter & Gamble Company score?

Starting at 8: Deduct 2 for five active greenwashing class actions filed May 2025 in federal courts plus earlier January 2025 Hagens Berman lawsuit, and NRDC SEC complaint alleging materially misleading forest claims. Deduct 1 for sustained multi-year NGO criticism from NRDC, Stand.earth, and RAN over boreal forest degradation and palm oil sourcing. Deduct 1 for InfluenceMap finding of limited climate policy engagement and membership in obstructive trade associations (US Chamber of Commerce, Ame

The Procter & Gamble Company Sustainability Score: 26/100

Recently scored: Dentsu, Omnicom, Publicis Groupe, WPP

507 companies scored·4 score updates this week

The Procter & Gamble Company·FMCG / Consumer Goods·Cincinnati, Ohio, United States·Founded 1837·Last verified 21 April 2026

out of 100

Significant gapsPending Review-7 since last review

P&G has cut operational emissions 60% but Scope 3—which dominates its footprint—is rising. Forest degradation via toilet paper sourcing, five active greenwashing lawsuits, and intensity-based (not absolute) Scope 3 targets expose a company optimizing optics while core business remains linear and extractive.

No challenges currently filed

The calculation

Every score shows its working.

Same formula for every company. No curve. No private weighting.

SINK = (0.3 × Base + 0.7 × Performance) × Scale

Industry base impact

FMCG / Consumer Goods sector ceiling.

30 / 100

Performance score

Sum of the 10 rubric questions, scored 0–10 each.

50 / 100

Raw score

Weighted average before scale penalty.

(0.3 × 30) + (0.7 × 50) = 44.0

Scale penalty

Multiplier based on absolute emissions volume — physics-first.

× 0.6

Final score

Rounded. Significant gaps.

26 / 100

The ten questions

Where The Procter & Gamble Company is strong, and where it isn't.

Strongest on Carbon Footprint — Operations and Energy Source (8/10, 8/10). Weakest on Nature & Biodiversity Impact and Controversies & Red Flags (2/10, 3/10).

Where the evidence comes from

Every document used, listed.

17 sources used in this assessment. All publicly available. Each row shows which rubric questions it informed.

[1]Self-reported

P&G Investor Relations: Environmental | Climate

Ongoing

Q1Q2Q3

Every score shows its working.

Where The Procter & Gamble Company is strong, and where it isn't.

Every document used, listed.

Where The Procter & Gamble Company sits among fmcg / consumer goods peers.

The Procter & Gamble Company's score over time.

This score is not currently being contested.

Related companies worth a look.

We'll let you know when the score moves.

Which companies moved this week, and why.