Learning Hub
Frequently asked questions about GLEC and Dcycle
Answers to the most common questions about logistics emission calculations with GLEC v3, the use of TOC factors, the intensity KPI, and how to measure the impact of route optimisation in Lean & Green.
This document covers the most frequently asked questions about logistics emission calculations with GLEC v3 and the Dcycle platform. It serves as a reference for teams involved in measuring logistics carbon footprints and Lean & Green plans.
Base methodology
Dcycle implements the GLEC Framework v3 (Global Logistics Emissions Council), the international standard for logistics emissions and the framework recognised by Lean & Green (AECOC / EvoKE).
Base GLEC formula:
tCO₂e = Load (t) × Distance (km) × TOC emission factor (tCO₂e/tkm)
- Load (t): Actual kg of the shipment (or estimated with load_factor)
- Distance (km): km of the leg assigned to that customer/shipment
- TOC factor: Fixed value by vehicle type, published by GLEC
Q1 — Do GLEC factors change based on the vehicle’s load percentage?
No. GLEC emission factors (in gCO₂e/tkm) are fixed by operation type (TOC). GLEC publishes a single average value per vehicle category, which already incorporates empty running (the typical % of km run empty in the sector).
| Framework | Does the factor vary with load %? |
|---|---|
| GLEC | No. Fixed factor per TOC. |
| DEFRA | Yes: average laden, 50% laden, full laden… |
Actual load is reflected in GLEC through the actual weight of the shipment. If you enter real kg, tkm are correct and emissions are proportional to weight.
Example — Rigid truck 26–32t Euro 6 (factor = 0.162 kgCO₂e/tkm):
Load Distance tkm Emissions 5,000 kg 203 km 1,015 164.4 kgCO₂e 2,500 kg 203 km 507.5 82.2 kgCO₂e The factor does not change. Emissions fall because there is less load.
Q2 — Can the base year be recalculated if we change the calculation method?
Technically yes, to maintain methodological comparability. But before doing so, verify:
- If the base year is linked to a formal commitment (Lean & Green, SBTi…), it may require validation from the certifying body.
- Any methodological change must be applied to all years (base + monitoring).
- If the new calculation yields a lower base year, the reduction target also becomes more demanding.
Recommendation: Consult AECOC / Lean & Green before any base-year recalculation.
Q3 — How are km assigned per leg and per customer in the data file?
Each line in the file represents a (leg × customer) pair. The distance_km field is assigned in full to each customer receiving goods on that leg — it is not summed across lines or prorated.
Example:
Movement
MOV-001, legLEG-A→ 203.3 km, 4 customers:
Customer Load Distance assigned Customer A 5,490.79 kg 203.3 km Customer B 256.08 kg 203.3 km Customer C 109.35 kg 203.3 km Customer D 89.04 kg 203.3 km If the same truck continues to leg
LEG-B(13.6 km) and Customer A also appears there: Total km attributed to Customer A = 203.3 + 13.6 = 216.9 km
This is consistent with GLEC: the distance assigned is that of the actual journey made for that specific delivery.
Q4 — What is the load_factor for and when should it be used?
The load_factor is an estimated load fraction for when you do not know the actual kg.
Effective load (kg) = declared_weight (kg) × load_factor
| Situation | Use load_factor? |
|---|---|
| You have actual shipment kg | No. Enter kg directly. load_factor = 1. |
| You only have pallets/units, no kg | Yes. Apply the estimated occupancy %. |
| You want to adjust a previous estimate | Yes. To correct the declared weight. |
Important
If you are already entering actual kg in the file, the load_factor must not be modified. Applying a load_factor on top of real kg distorts the measurement and violates the GLEC principle of using the best available data.
Q5 — Why does the intensity KPI not change when I modify the load?
This is mathematically correct. Test example:
| Test 1 | Test 2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Effective load | 1 kg × 0.1 = 0.1 kg | 300 kg × 0.8 = 240 kg |
| Total tkm | 753.94 | 226,180.99 |
| Total kgCO₂e | 129.48 | 38,842.89 |
| KPI (kgCO₂/tkm) | 0.1717 | 0.1717 |
The mathematical demonstration:
KPI = tCO₂e / tkm
= [load × km × TOC_EF] / [load × km]
= TOC_EF ← load and km cancel out
The intensity KPI always equals the average emission factor of the vehicles used. Absolute emissions are very different (129 kg vs 38,842 kg), but the ratio is the same because the same vehicles perform the same type of operation.
The only way to move the intensity KPI is to use vehicles with a lower emission factor (different TOC category or alternative fuel).
Q6 — Does improving data quality reduce emissions?
Improving data quality is a precision lever, not a reduction lever.
| Previous situation | When switching to actual kg | Effect |
|---|---|---|
| You were overestimating kg | Actual kg are lower | Calculated emissions fall |
| You were underestimating kg | Actual kg are higher | Calculated emissions rise |
| Estimate was accurate | No significant difference | No change |
The value of improving data quality lies in credibility and auditability (Lean & Green, CSRD, customers) and in having a real basis for operational decisions.
Q7 — Route optimisation and load consolidation: does their impact appear in Lean & Green?
The question: “Route optimisation was one of our Lean & Green plan objectives. But if the intensity KPI only improves when we change the vehicle, how do we measure the impact of optimising routes or consolidating loads?”
Answer
The confusion comes from using the wrong KPI to measure these actions. There are two KPIs with completely different purposes:
Intensity KPI (tCO₂e/tkm) → measures vehicle efficiency. It only improves by changing the vehicle type or fuel. When you optimise routes and reduce km, this ratio does not change because tkm and tCO₂e fall in the same proportion.
Absolute emissions (total tCO₂e) → measures total real impact. This is the KPI Lean & Green uses for compliance with the reduction commitment (Star 1 = -20% in 5 years, Star 2 = -40%).
Key takeaway
Route optimisation → fewer km → fewer absolute tCO₂e → YES, it counts for Lean & Green
Load consolidation → fewer trips for the same goods → fewer absolute tCO₂e → YES, it counts for Lean & Green
The tCO₂e/tkm will not improve with these actions — but that is not the Lean & Green compliance KPI.
Example — route optimisation (−15% km)
| Without optimisation | With −15% km | |
|---|---|---|
| Trips | 100 | 100 |
| km/trip | 200 km | 170 km |
| Total tkm | 200,000 | 170,000 |
| Total tCO₂e | X | 0.85X (−15%) |
| KPI tCO₂e/tkm | 0.162 | 0.162 (unchanged) |
Absolute emissions fall by 15% — exactly what Lean & Green tracks for the target.
Example — load consolidation (eliminating trips)
| Without consolidation | With consolidation | |
|---|---|---|
| Trips | 10 of 5 t, 200 km | 5 of 10 t, 200 km |
| Total km | 2,000 km | 1,000 km |
| Total tCO₂e | Y | 0.5Y (−50%) |
The key to consolidation is not fitting more kg into the same trip — it is making fewer trips to move the same amount of goods.
Which KPI to use for each lever?
| Lever | Total tCO₂e | tCO₂e/tkm | tCO₂e/delivery | tCO₂e/t delivered |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Change TOC / efficient vehicle | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ |
| Alternative fuel | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ |
| Route optimisation | ↓ | → | ↓ | ↓ |
| Load consolidation | ↓ | → | ↓ | depends |
| Eliminate empty running | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ |
Recommended KPIs for Lean & Green tracking in Dcycle
- Total tCO₂e — Lean & Green commitment compliance
- tCO₂e per delivery made — captures consolidation and route efficiency
- tCO₂e per tonne delivered — captures load efficiency
- Total annual km — direct indicator of route optimisation
- tCO₂e/tkm — fleet efficiency (only improves with TOC or fuel changes)
How route optimisation impact appears in a Lean & Green plan
The most common point of confusion
Companies with an active Lean & Green plan typically have three types of reduction measures: fleet renewal, operational improvements (duo-trailer, backhauling…), and route optimisation. When they find that changing load or km does not move the intensity KPI, they conclude that route optimisation “does not work”. That conclusion is wrong — it comes from looking at the wrong indicator.
The two indicators and what moves each
Intensity KPI (kgCO₂e/tkm)
This is the vehicle’s footprint: how much it emits per tonne moved one kilometre. It is fixed by vehicle type (TOC). It only improves if you change the vehicle or fuel. Analogy: it is a car’s fuel consumption per 100 km — it does not change based on how much weight you carry or how short the trip is. It only changes if you change the engine.
Absolute emissions (tCO₂e/year)
This is the total annual impact. This falls with route optimisation, load consolidation, and trip elimination. And this is the Lean & Green compliance KPI (Star 1 = -20% in 5 years, measured as % reduction in relative emissions vs. base year).
How route optimisation works within a Lean & Green plan
In GLEC methodology, optimising routes means reducing km travelled to deliver the same amount of goods. This translates directly into fewer total tkm and fewer absolute emissions.
tkm avoided by optimisation × TOC factor = kgCO₂e saved
Example with a reference logistics company (base 293M tkm, Euro 5 fleet):
| Year | tkm avoided | kgCO₂e saved | % of total plan |
|---|---|---|---|
| Year 2 | 2,355,022 | 449,809 | 8% |
| Year 3 | 4,710,045 | 899,618 | 7% |
| Year 5 | 11,775,114 | 2,249,046 | 17% |
The intensity KPI (kgCO₂e/tkm) does not change because the vehicle type is the same. The saving is visible in absolute emissions — which is what Lean & Green counts.
Real levers in a Lean & Green plan and their relative weight
In a typical plan for a logistics operator with diesel vehicles:
| Lever | % reduction contributed | KPI it moves |
|---|---|---|
| Fleet renewal (Euro 6, HVO, EV) | 75–85% of total | Intensity KPI + absolute emissions |
| High-capacity vehicles (duo-trailer) | 5–10% | Absolute emissions |
| Route optimisation | 8–17% | Absolute emissions |
Fleet renewal is always the main driver. Route optimisation is a valid complementary lever with real impact — but visible only in absolute emissions.
How to track route optimisation in Dcycle
| KPI | How to calculate it | What it indicates |
|---|---|---|
| tkm per tonne delivered | Total tkm / total tonnes for period | If it falls, routes are more efficient |
| Average km per leg | Mean of distance_km by service type | If it falls, routes are shorter |
| Total tCO₂e | Sum of emissions for period | The Lean & Green compliance KPI |
| Shipments per tonne | Total movements / total tonnes | If it falls, there is more consolidation |
Key message
Route optimisation does reduce emissions and does count toward the Lean & Green objective. What it does not do is move the vehicle efficiency indicator (kgCO₂e/tkm) — that only improves with fleet renewal. To see the real impact, look at total tkm per tonne delivered: if that number falls quarter by quarter, routes are improving and the plan is progressing.
Glossary
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| GLEC | Global Logistics Emissions Council. Framework for calculating carbon footprint in transport. |
| TOC | Transport Operation Category. Classification of vehicle type with its emission factor. |
| WTW | Well-to-Wheel. GLEC factors include the full chain: fuel production + combustion. |
| tkm | Tonne-kilometres. Unit of transport work = load (t) × distance (km). |
| tCO₂e | Tonnes of CO₂ equivalent. Includes CO₂, CH₄, and N₂O. |
| load_factor | Load factor. Fraction (0–1) to estimate actual load when exact kg are unknown. |
| Intensity KPI | tCO₂e/tkm. Vehicle efficiency. Only improves with better TOC or fuel. |
| Absolute KPI | Total tCO₂e. Total impact. Improves with any reduction in activity or efficiency. |
| Empty running | % of km the vehicle travels empty. Already incorporated in GLEC average factors. |
| Lean & Green | Logistics sustainability certification. Star 1 = -20% emissions in 5 years. Uses GLEC methodology. |
Was this helpful?
What was missing or unclear? (optional)
Sent. Thank you for helping us improve.