Embodied Carbon in Focus at the End of 2025

TL;DR

Embodied carbon has evolved from a niche topic to a decision-relevant factor in 2025. The focus is clearly shifting from individual projects to comparable, controllable data across projects and portfolios—particularly in a Scope 3 context. Methodology, data quality, and early availability are becoming decisive.

‍

‍

As the year comes to a close, one thing is clear: embodied carbon is now one of the central topics in the construction and real estate sector. The discussion has gained depth and shifted noticeably—from isolated flagship projects to systematic questions across entire project pipelines and portfolios. For investors, developers, and asset owners, the question is no longer whether, but how: how can embodied carbon be assessed early, reliably, and comparably - at the point where decisions have real impact?

‍

3rd Swiss Symposium on Embodied Carbon – From Relevance to Implementation

The 3rd Swiss Symposium on Embodied Carbon in the Construction Sector clearly demonstrated how broadly the topic is now anchored. Representatives from real estate and construction, public authorities, certification bodies, politics, and research came together in one place.

For the first time, the symposium was held in a combined format covering both building and civil engineering - two disciplines with different data maturity levels, standards, and decision logics, and therefore significant potential to learn from one another.

As an event partner, we had the opportunity to engage in many conversations and gain direct insights into where the market is heading. One message stood out clearly: the demand for data-driven analysis and optimisation is growing most strongly where methodological clarity meets operational reality.

‍

Scope 3 in the Real Estate Context: Methodology as a Common Language

An important reference framework is provided by the Scope 3 Whitepaper of the Circular Construction Charter (in german). The Charter brings together leading Swiss asset owners and investors.

The whitepaper shows how emissions from construction and the building life cycle can be assigned to the relevant Scope 3 categories, and how existing standards - particularly SIA 2032 - can be applied. This creates a practical foundation that addresses both project and portfolio levels.

Central to this is the clear differentiation between three calculation approaches:

• Component-based life cycle assessment in accordance with SIA 2032
• Benchmark-based extrapolations for standardised applications
• Spend-based approaches where data availability is limited

At vyzn, we deliberately focus on the component-based methodology, as it enables the most precise assessment of embodied carbon. In practice, however, this approach is often complex and only available late in the process. This is exactly where our software simplifies the process step by step and in a model-based way, enabling reliable CO₂ indicators early in the project lifecycle. These results can be compared, aggregated, and used for variant studies—without compromising methodological consistency.

‍

From Project Decisions to Portfolio Steering

A recent analysis by Wüest Partner (in german) shows that the most effective levers for reducing embodied carbon lie very early in the project lifecycle—in structural design, construction systems, material choices, and fundamental use assumptions.

For investors, this means that embodied carbon must be considered (or explicitly specified) early in construction projects, and only becomes manageable when it is systematically comparable across multiple projects. Individual LCAs provide valuable depth, but they are not sufficient for strategic portfolio decisions. What is needed are consistent data models that allow variants to be compared, emission hotspots to be identified, and impacts on the overall portfolio to be assessed.

‍

Conclusion

As the year ends, it is clear: embodied carbon is technically established, methodologically tangible, and operationally relevant. The discussion has moved on—the focus today is on implementation and impact.

Those who want to effectively reduce embodied carbon do not need further fundamental debates, but data that enables decisions. This is where the difference is made between calculation and real-world impact.

‍

‍