It was hard, but there it is, there is the international standard requirements for cuantification and communication of the Product Carbon Footprint (goods and services), so cuantification of carbon footprint is certifiable. The rule is already in effect since May and brings much value over the previous status with too many criteria, differences in concepts, studies and statements of carbon footprint that made imposible to compare and certify, and in which it was not possible to deposit a lot of confidence. This standard incorporates new aspects evolving on PAS 2050, which was the previous best known international standard, although it was not really a norm but a certifiable standard or method.
Demand for Carbon Footprint certification is related to seeking cost reductions via energy savings and efficiency, focusing to product or service, though never forget criteria of image and reputation. There are several highly anticipated aspects that brings the standard, and nearly all of them are expressed in the product Carbon Footprint definition: It's the adition of emissions and removals of greenhouse gases (GHG) in a product system, expressed as CO2e (equivalent CO2), based on the assessment of the product life cycle using as unique category of impact, climate change. No, not simple, and requires spme work, but it is clear that the reduction of CO2e requires to reduce energy consumption, which is always saving. Only left out of the definition, the communication requirement.
This standard is to establish some order in the carbon footprint world, and meets a series of demands from business, and certainly now it will be possible to compare, even better when we get the sector guides. It is very close to the evaluation of Kyoto GHG inventory and life cycle analysis, which had been doing, but even on those concepts it establishes some criteria that a given organization can not change, if you want to get certified. In this regard, it is important to make changes necessary to assess the impact beyond the organization, it is necessary to manage product life cycle, not only accounted by CO2 but not CO2e, initially differently from kyoto, which does not mean that it can't be certified stepwise carbon footprint or by processing units, which may be useful for reduction plans and decision making.
This norm can be also used as a continuous improvement tool, and can be used in the sustainability reports, is valid for product and services and due to all that, in this scope is ahead of the GRI GHG protocol.
You can account for ATEC+ID for your Carbon Footprint implementation.