Scope 3 emissions (indirect emissions that occur in a company’s value chain) represent the largest and most complex portion of a corporate carbon footprint. According to the CDP Global Supply Chain Report, Scope 3 emissions are, on average, 11.4 times higher than operational (Scope 1 and 2) emissions combined.
While organizations increasingly scrutinize upstream supply chains, downstream waste emissions often remain an afterthought in ESG strategies. However, the EPA estimates that roughly 42% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions are associated with the energy used to produce, process, transport, and dispose of goods and food.
As pressure grows to meet Net Zero commitments, companies must recognize that waste disposal is not just an operational necessity — it is a material lever for controlling Scope 3 performance.
Many organizations erroneously assume that environmental responsibility ends once waste materials leave their facility. However, under the GHG Protocol, waste disposal is a distinct and required category for reporting. Ignoring this leads to significant underreporting, particularly regarding methane.
Landfills are the third-largest source of human-related methane emissions in the United States – and have recently been identified as releasing even more methane than previously reported. Given that methane (CH4) is more than 80 times as potent as carbon dioxide (CO2) at trapping heat over a 20-year period, failing to account for landfill impact creates a massive gap in emissions data.
"Landfill diversion" is a volume metric, not a carbon metric. A company might achieve "zero waste-to-landfill" by shipping waste hundreds of miles to an inefficient recycler, potentially generating more carbon emissions than a local disposal option. Without a lifecycle assessment approach — such as that used in the EPA’s WARM Model — companies risk overstating their progress toward ESG goals.
Waste-related emissions generally fall under Category 5: Waste Generated in Operations of the Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Standard. This covers emissions from third-party disposal and treatment of waste generated in the reporting company’s owned or controlled operations.
The emissions profile varies drastically by method:
The delta between disposal methods is quantifiable.
According to the EPA’s WARM, recycling 1 ton of aluminum cans reduces emissions by approximately 9.13 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) compared to landfilling it. Conversely, the EPA's 2023 Methane Report reveals that for every 1 ton of food waste sent to a landfill, approximately 0.84 metric tons of CO2e are released as fugitive methane — emissions that could be entirely avoided through composting, anaerobic digestion, or WTE.
Contamination ruins the economics and the carbon math of recycling. In this context, “contamination” refers to when unwanted or harmful substances mix with certain waste streams, degrading their quality, disrupting recycling, and creating health / environmental hazards.
When a recycling load is rejected due to contamination (which occurs in roughly 25% of recycling streams), the material is often landfilled. This results in a "double carbon penalty": the emissions from the initial transport to the recycling facility, plus the emissions of transport to the landfill and subsequent decomposition.
Transport is a major component of Scope 3. According to the Environmental and Energy Study Institute, the freight sector is responsible for 29% of total U.S. transportation emissions. Choosing a distant "green" disposal facility over a closer, slightly less optimal facility requires careful calculation. If the "sustainable" solution requires trucking waste 500 miles, the diesel emissions may negate the disposal benefits.
Many companies estimate emissions based on "spend" (dollars spent on waste services), which is notoriously inaccurate. Shifting to "activity-based" data (actual weight and material type) allows for precision.
The EPA Center for Corporate Climate Leadership emphasizes that activity data leads to more actionable reduction strategies.
Cost and diversion rates are no longer sufficient KPIs.
Companies should integrate Carbon Intensity (CI) metrics into waste vendor selection. This means analyzing the total CO2e impact of the waste journey, from the loading dock to final disposition.
Siloed departments create inefficiencies. Procurement may chase the lowest price, while Sustainability chases the lowest carbon. Alignment is critical, especially as regulations like California’s SB 253 and the EU’s CSRD mandate strict Scope 3 disclosure, making waste data a matter of legal compliance, not just voluntary reporting.
Third-party waste partners play a critical role in providing reliable data, documentation, and emissions transparency needed for ESG disclosures and audits.
Strategic waste partners utilize tools aligned with the GHG Protocol to convert tons of waste into metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent. This audit-grade data is essential for verified reporting.
Not all waste is recyclable. Strategic partners can identify non-recyclable streams suitable for AEF or WTE processing. These pathways can divert waste from landfills, avoid the emissions they release, and reduce industrial reliance on fossil fuels for day-to-day operations.
Waste management represents one of the most practical (and controllable) levers for reducing Scope 3 emissions.
When companies move beyond basic diversion metrics and evaluate waste through a carbon and ESG lens, they unlock opportunities to reduce emissions, manage risk, and strengthen environmental performance. As regulatory scrutiny and stakeholder expectations continue to rise, organizations that integrate waste into their broader scope emissions strategy will be better positioned to meet environmental goals and demonstrate credible progress toward net zero, or even carbon-negative objectives.
Don’t let your waste remain a Scope 3 blind spot. Our team uses EPA-aligned modeling to help you transition from simple diversion metrics to audit-ready carbon data. Connect with us and discover the impact your waste is having on your carbon footprint.