A common query is “Why are the outcomes on the results page different from the ones on the project main page?” In other words, why doesn’t the CO2e-value on the results page match the Carbon Heros Benchmark?
Great questions. Here are the answers.
Results page
- On the top left we see the total emissions (over the whole life-cycle and for the whole building).
- For the middle column, this sum is divided by the calculation period and the building’s area (as Gross Internal Floor Area, GIFA). GIFA is used to increase the comparativeness with the outcomes of other tools, but if another area metric is required, the other results of the tool will thus be different.
- The result relevant to the used tool is shown in the table below (highlighted in green). In the case of LEED, total emissions are to be shown. Rounding is applied to simplify the result next to the cloud, while the more detailed value is in the table.
Project Page
- Result in the column of the variant and row of the tool:
Here, the outcome as per the tool is shown again - it should therefore be consistent with the value in the table. However, rounding may disguise this. - Benchmark of carbon emissions:
Discrepancies stem from different scopes: The included modules, calculation period and other parameters may vary between the the chosen tool and the Carbon Heros Benchmark. Using a common method for all projects is done to reach sufficient data. This article delves deeper into what exactly may cause differences.
Please let me know if you have any more questions on this.