Quick snapshot, who's expected to move this forward

• Who will sponsor and sign off at the executive level for this decarbonization engagement? Options: Chief Sustainability Officer, VP Energy/Operations, CFO or Head of Finance, Chief Strategy Officer, Board-level committee, Other
• Which functions on your side will need to be regularly involved during diagnostics and roadmap development? Options: Operations/site leadership, Finance/FP&A, Procurement, Legal/compliance, Energy or utilities team, Sustainability/ESG reporting, IT/data team, Other
• How do your executives currently frame the priority of board-level emissions commitments in relation to production and margin goals?
• Roughly how many physical sites, plants, or operational campuses do you expect to include in the initial engagement scope? Options: 1, 2-5, 6-20, 21-100, More than 100
• Tell me about the last time leadership changed an emissions target or public commitment, what triggered it and what happened afterwards?
• If you could not identify a named executive sponsor with budget authority, would you still proceed with an external diagnostic? Options: Yes, No, Only with an internal champion identified first

If the board asked for proof next quarter, what would we need to show?

• What single executive concern about decarbonization would make you pause this engagement immediately?
• How urgent is the board's timeline for measurable emissions reductions? Options: Immediate, within 6 months, Short term, 6-12 months, Medium term, 12-36 months, Long term, over 36 months, Unspecified
• Which top three KPIs would your board insist are included in any success metric for this engagement? Options: Scope 1 tCO2e reduction, Scope 2 tCO2e reduction, Cost per tCO2e abated, Capital spend vs budget, Payback period, Scope 3 supplier engagement
• Who on your leadership team must be explicitly convinced before capital is allocated, and what evidence would convince them?
• If the seller delivered a technically valid roadmap that exceeded short-term capital limits, would you accept a phased rollout tied to early wins? Options: Yes, willing to phase, Maybe, depending on early savings, No, need full funding upfront

Where the numbers actually live, and how easily we'll reach them

• Show me how clean and accessible your fuel, utility, and emissions data are today and where formal access will be required
• Which of these systems currently hold your operational energy and emissions records? Options: Energy management system (EMS), Building management system (BMS), ERP or maintenance system, Utility billing portal, Manual spreadsheets, Third-party aggregator, Other
• Who owns the API keys, data contracts, or spreadsheet directories for those systems and can grant access?
• How old is the typical meter-level data you can provide for a pilot site? Options: Real-time or sub-hourly, Daily granularity, Weekly or monthly, Only monthly invoices, No reliable meter-level data
• Is there any site, regulatory, or contractual restriction that would prevent us from accessing half-hourly energy consumption or emissions data for an initial diagnostic? Options: No restrictions, Yes, some restrictions - can be waived, Yes, legally restricted - cannot access

Where projects tend to stall, and which constraints bite hardest

• What specific operational constraint at a site would make the modeled abatement pathway impossible to achieve?
• How often do unplanned maintenance or production priorities force energy projects to be delayed at your sites? Options: Almost always, Often, Occasionally, Rarely
• Which immature technologies are you most nervous about relying on in plan scenarios? Options: Hydrogen for process heat, Large scale CCS, High temperature electric heat pumps, Biomass sourcing, Novel industrial electrification tech, Other
• Who in operations holds formal veto power over changes to major capital projects and how do they typically evaluate new proposals?
• If a pilot site failed to demonstrate expected savings, what proof would you require before approving a broader rollout?

The alternatives you're weighing

• What would your incumbent consultant or internal team have to demonstrate to keep this work internal or with them instead of switching to an external partner?
• Which of the following alternatives are you actively evaluating right now? Options: Existing incumbent consultant, Build an internal decarbonization team, Software-first vendor with modeling tools, Engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) firm, Utility-led partnership, Do nothing / monitor
• How long would your team need to produce an equivalent emissions baseline and MACC internally? Options: Less than 4 weeks, 4-8 weeks, 2-3 months, Longer than 3 months, Not feasible with current headcount
• Who inside has advocated for solving this without an outside partner and what would persuade them to support an external engagement instead?
• What price range or commercial structure would make you sign with a new partner this quarter? Options: Low fixed fee pilot, Time and materials, Milestone-based payments tied to acceptance, Success fee tied to realized savings, Not set / need internal estimate

Decision economics, what the CFO will focus on

• What capital hurdle rate, payback limit, or ROI threshold would immediately disqualify otherwise attractive projects?
• Which financial model format would your CFO require for each candidate project? Options: NPV by project with discount rate, IRR, Simple payback, Cashflow profile and impact on balance sheet, A mix of the above
• How do you treat internal or shadow carbon pricing in project valuations today? Options: We use explicit internal carbon price, We model scenarios with and without carbon price, We do not include carbon price today, Unsure
• If a recommended project relied on external incentives or grants, how confident are you those incentives will still be available when you implement? Options: Very confident, Moderately confident, Uncertain, Not confident
• If the pilot proves the model, what would stop you from moving to procurement and contracting that same quarter?

Ready, set, governance and resourcing

• What governance forum will make the go or no-go decisions and how frequently does it meet?
• Do you have dedicated internal resources we can expect to allocate for the diagnostic and modeling phase? Options: Yes, a dedicated team is assigned, Yes, but responsibilities are split across teams, No, vendor will need to lead and provide staff, Unsure
• Which compliance, legal, or procurement approvals typically add the most lead time to a project like this? Options: Procurement RFP process, Legal contract review, Security/data access review, Regulatory permitting, Internal capital committee approval, Other
• What internal deadline or external obligation would force our work to compress into fewer than 8 weeks? Options: Board reporting deadline, Customer supply chain requirement, Regulatory compliance date, Capital planning cycle, No hard deadline
• If critical data access or governance approvals are delayed beyond your target start date, are you willing to provisionally scope the engagement around a smaller pilot to keep momentum? Options: Yes, willing to pilot, Maybe, need discussion, No, must have full scope start

Acceptance criteria and the single metric that changes everything

• What single measurable outcome would make the board call this engagement a success?
• List the acceptance criteria your CFO would insist on before releasing final payment for the diagnostic and roadmap deliverables
• How will you validate emissions reductions, through third-party audit, internal metering reconciliation, regulatory reporting, or another method? Options: Third-party verification, Internal metering and reconciliation, Regulatory reporting as validation, Combination of the above, Other
• Who must sign off on each deliverable and at what formal gate do they approve acceptance?
• If the delivered roadmap meets technical targets but a named executive refuses sign-off, what escalation path would you use to resolve the disagreement?

Next steps, timeline commitment, and what would make this happen now

• Assuming we had pilot results next month, what approval would compress your procurement decision to within 30 days?
• Which of the following best describes your internal budget status for this work? Options: Budget already allocated, Budget pending approval, Compete for capital with other projects, No budget yet, need business case
• How soon could the key signers meet to review a pilot deliverable? Options: Within 1 week, 2-4 weeks, 1-2 months, Longer than 2 months
• Who has final signature authority for contracts up to the estimated pilot cost?
• On a scale from 1 to 5, how likely are you to proceed if the pilot validates both the savings and the payback within your stated thresholds? Options: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
• Are you ready to share a draft of your most recent emissions target, board memo, or capital planning note to align scope and metrics? Options: Yes, we can share now, We can share after an NDA, Not yet, need internal clearance, No

• Data Collection Kickoff and Access Plan
• Site 1 Operational Data Walkthrough
• Site 2 Operational Data Walkthrough
• Scope 3 and Logistics Data Workshop
• Consolidated Data Validation and Modeling Handoff

• Confirm Site 1 production profile and operating calendar
• Initiate supplier outreach according to the agreed timeline and record expected response dates.
• Recap collected datasets and outstanding gaps
• The consolidated baseline input dataset is accepted or each disputed item has a documented evidence requirement and deadline.
• Modeling start date and first deliverable are confirmed so work can proceed without delay.
• A short list of follow-on measurement or data tasks required during modeling is captured with timelines.
• Finalize and publish the accepted dataset package and the dispute log with required evidence and deadlines.
• Begin modeling runs on the confirmed start date using the accepted inputs and documented assumptions.
• Execute any agreed temporary measurement or supplier follow-up actions and provide results by the documented deadlines.
• Confirm engagement scope and success criteria
• A complete data inventory by scope with file format and historic period is agreed.
• Data access method and transfer protocol are confirmed and scheduled.
• Dates for Site 1 and Site 2 working sessions and the site constraint template are finalized.
• Produce and share the formal data request spreadsheet listing required fields, formats, and sample extracts.
• Provide the data access method or credentials for the agreed transfer protocol or integration endpoint.
• Publish the per-site working session calendar with required pre-read materials at least 5 business days before each site session.
• Site 1 operating assumptions are validated or disputed with required evidence documented.
• A prioritized list of Site 1 constraints and any required metering or sampling activities is produced.
• A clear list of outstanding Site 1 data extracts and their delivery deadlines is agreed.
• Deliver missing equipment lists and recent meter extracts identified during the session.
• Provide evidence or correction for any disputed assumptions noted in the validation log.
• Schedule any agreed temporary meter installations or site visits and provide target dates.
• Confirm Site 2 role and operating characteristics
• Site 2 operating and emissions-relevant assumptions are validated or flagged with required evidence.
• A Site 2-specific constraint list and remediation timeline is produced.
• Decision on whether additional site visits or temporary metering at Site 2 are required is recorded.
• Provide the identified missing Site 2 data extracts and equipment documentation.
• Submit dates for any agreed Site 2 site visits or meter installations.
• Document any temporary proxies to be used for Site 2 pending receipt of measured data.
• Top Scope 3 categories to include in the baseline are confirmed.
• A pragmatic data approach for each gap is agreed, including proxies and replacement criteria.
• Supplier outreach template and schedule are approved and ready for deployment.
• Publish the supplier data request template and the prioritized supplier contact list.
• Confirm Scope 3 boundary and top emission categories
• Document chosen proxies and emission factors with the conditions under which measured data must replace them.
• Review equipment, fuel, and energy inventory and metering
• Review existing supplier and logistics data availability
• Review required dataset inventory by scope
• Present draft baseline numbers and sensitivity notes
• Review Site 2 equipment, fuel mix, and metering coverage
• Agree data access, security, and transfer protocol
• Validate key modeling assumptions and inputs
• Decision log for acceptance or dispute of items
• Validate assumptions and identify data gaps
• Agree proxies, emission factors, and calculation method for gaps
• Authorize modeling start and confirm next deliverables
• Finalize per-site session schedule and site-level templates
• Agree Site 2 remediation actions and timeline
• Finalize supplier outreach template and timeline
• Document site constraints and measurement needs

• Deliver Scope 1–3 Emissions Inventory
• Clean and Normalize Operational and Utility Data
• Build Marginal Abatement Cost Curve
• Model Project-Level Financial Returns and Payback
• Develop Technology Selection and Engineering Specs
• Deliver Multi-year Capital Implementation Roadmap
• Qualify Incentives, Grants, and Financing Options
• Implement Scope 3 Supplier Data Collection Program
• Design and Support Pilot and Demonstration Projects
• Prepare Procurement Packages and Vendor RFI/RFPs
• Set Up Measurement, Reporting, and Verification (MRV)
• Produce Board‑Ready Emissions and Investment Reporting
• Deliver Operations Handover and O&M Training Materials

Deliver Scope 1–3 Emissions Inventory

• Do you have site-level utility bills and fuel invoices for the last 24 months (PDFs or CSVs)? Options: Yes, full 24 months, Partial (12-23 months), Under 12 months, No
• Which greenhouse gas accounting boundary do you require (for example Greenhouse Gas Protocol operational control, financial control, or equity share)? Options: Operational control, Financial control, Equity share, Unsure
• How many distinct production lines or facilities should be baselined separately for Scope 1–3? Options: 1, 2-5, 6-20, More than 20
• Provide supporting artifacts for stationary sources such as single-line electrical diagrams, equipment nameplate lists, and fuel storage tank manifests
• Identify the material flows that drive Scope 3 for your sector (for example purchased steel tonnage, process feedstock volumes, or outsourced thermal processing hours)
• What evidence will validate the Scope 1–3 inventory as accepted internally (for example CFO sign-off memo, board resolution citing the inventory, or third-party verification statement)?

Clean and Normalize Operational and Utility Data

• List the native export formats available from your building management system or energy management system (for example 15-minute CSV, OPC historian extract)
• Are interval meter reads available for steam, electricity, and compressed air at the submeter level? Options: Full submeter coverage, Partial coverage, Only site-level utility bills, No interval data
• Specify known gaps or irregularities in time-series data such as daylight saving adjustments, meter firmware resets, or timezone mismatches
• Estimate the data cleaning effort by number of meters requiring timezone alignment or interpolation Options: Low (under 10 meters), Medium (10-50 meters), High (50+ meters)
• For which systems can you provide access credentials or secure extracts (for example distributed control system DCS, building automation system BAS, or vendor portal)? Options: DCS, BAS, Vendor portal, None of the above
• Select any compliance or privacy constraints that limit sharing meter-level data (for example customer confidentiality, non-disclosure agreements, or local data residency rules) Options: Customer confidentiality restrictions, Active non-disclosure agreements, Local data residency constraints, No constraints

Build Marginal Abatement Cost Curve

• Who should be the internal approver of the marginal abatement cost curve assumptions (for example head of operations, CFO, sustainability director)?
• State the baseline year and activity metric to normalize abatement potentials (for example 2023 baseline, metric tons CO2e per 1,000 production tonnes) Options: 2023, 2022, Custom year, Unsure
• Indicate the abatement measures to include in the MACC such as boiler conversions, electrification of process heaters, heat recovery, and onsite renewables
• Quantify expected annual reduction ranges for a key measure (for example percent steam reduction from an economizer retrofit or kW savings per motor variable frequency drive installation)
• Outline the capital and operations and maintenance cost inputs you can provide per measure (for example vendor quotes, historical project costs, or bill of materials)
• Select carbon price and fuel price scenarios to be modeled (for example internal price, regulatory price trajectory, and high-stress case) Options: Internal price trajectory, Regulatory price floor, High-stress scenario, Custom scenario

Model Project-Level Financial Returns and Payback

• Name the individual who signs capital approvals and their required payback threshold (for example payback under 3 years or minimum internal rate of return)
• Assess whether internal accounting requires including incentives, accelerated depreciation, or tax credits in financial modeling Options: Include all confirmed incentives and tax credits, Model both with and without incentives, Exclude incentives from baseline
• Enumerate the capital funding sources available to projects such as capex budget, operating lease, third-party finance, or energy performance contracts
• Detail historical project cost data available for benchmarking such as recent boiler upgrades, CHP installations, or major retrofit invoices
• How long should the model horizon be for financial analysis (for example 5 years, 10 years, project life)? Options: 5 years, 10 years, Project life, Custom
• Choose the financial metrics you require in deliverables such as net present value NPV, internal rate of return IRR, simple payback, or cash-on-cash return Options: NPV, IRR, Simple payback, Cash-on-cash

Develop Technology Selection and Engineering Specs

• Supply any vendor-preferred equipment lists or approved vendor catalogs we should use when developing specifications
• Will you provide single-line electrical diagrams and piping and instrumentation diagrams P&IDs for the candidate sites? Options: Both provided, Only single-line diagrams, Only P&IDs, Not provided
• State required engineering standards to reference such as ASME boiler codes, IEC motor standards, or internal engineering specifications
• For electrification measures, describe transformer nameplate data and site maximum demand constraints needed to size upgrades
• Where are structural or footprint constraints documented for rooftop or indoor equipment installations (for example roof load certificates, structural drawings, or crane access plans)?
• When must equipment specifications be finalized to align with long-lead procurement windows? Options: Immediately for long-lead items, Within 3 months, Within 6 months, Flexible

Deliver Multi-year Capital Implementation Roadmap

• When do you expect the first pilot to start and run (for example Q3 2026 or within 6 months of report delivery)?
• Choose target budget bands per phase or per site for capital deployment over the 5-year horizon Options: $0-$1M, $1M-$5M, $5M-$20M, Over $20M
• Name critical path milestones that depend on external partners such as utility interconnection studies, emissions permit amendments, or long-lead equipment procurement
• Indicate expected allowable construction windows per site considering production schedules and lockout/tagout LOTO constraints Options: Night shifts only, Planned weekend outages, Extended shutdowns allowed, No shutdowns
• What acceptance criteria will confirm a roadmap phase is ready to proceed to procurement (for example approved budget line, signed owner acceptance form, completed site readiness checklist)?
• Confirm whether the roadmap should include a project-level risk register and contingency budget line items Options: Include full risk register and contingency, Include high-level risks only, Do not include

Qualify Incentives, Grants, and Financing Options

• Provide a list of incentive programs or grants previously applied for or received (for example state energy rebates, federal tax credits, or utility efficiency programs)
• Identify the jurisdiction and utility territory for each candidate site to assess program eligibility
• Confirm whether tax-equity financing or third-party ownership models are permitted under your corporate policies Options: Tax-equity permitted, Third-party ownership permitted, Neither permitted, Unsure
• How long are typical lead times for incentive approvals or grant disbursements in your experience? Options: Under 4 weeks, 4-12 weeks, 3-6 months, Over 6 months
• For which measures do you want us to prepare application-ready documentation versus advisory support (for example rooftop solar, heat recovery, heat pumps)?
• Specify whether you expect sample finance term sheets and payback scenarios to be delivered for board review Options: Yes include term sheets, No, provide advisory only, Provide only for high-priority projects

Implement Scope 3 Supplier Data Collection Program

• Describe the supplier data attributes you require from top-tier vendors such as bill of materials, transport mode and distance, and supplier-specific emission factors
• For each supplier tier, estimate the percentage of spend you can reliably map to specific suppliers today Options: >90% spend coverage, 70-89% spend coverage, 50-69% spend coverage, <50% spend coverage
• Where do you store supplier contracts and purchase orders that we can use to link spend to supplier emissions (for example ERP system, procurement CSV exports, or contract repository)?
• Will you allow secure API or SFTP access for automated supplier data ingestion versus manual Excel uploads? Options: API or SFTP access allowed, Excel uploads only, Mixed approach
• How will you handle supplier nonresponse or incomplete submissions for calculation of supplier-specific emissions (for example use spend-weighted averages, default emission factors, or escalate to procurement)? Options: Use spend-weighted averages, Apply default sector emission factors, Escalate to procurement for follow-up, Hybrid approach
• Determine the threshold for suppliers to be included in the Scope 3 program (for example top 80% of spend, top 100 suppliers by spend, or suppliers above a CO2e intensity threshold) Options: Top 80% of spend, Top 100 suppliers by spend, Suppliers above intensity threshold

Design and Support Pilot and Demonstration Projects

• List candidate sites suitable for pilot demonstrations with available outage windows and measurement access
• Describe the measurement setup required for pilot validation such as mobile metering, fuel flowmeters, or submeter installations
• Detail target success criteria for pilots including percent energy reduction, validated kW or kWh savings, or repeatable operational process changes
• Specify where pilot data will be stored and who will own the dataset for analysis (for example centralized historian, cloud storage, or shared secure folder)
• Estimate expected duration for each pilot or demonstration project needed to produce specific results Options: 4-6 weeks, 2-3 months, 4-6 months, Longer than 6 months
• Enumerate safety and commissioning requirements for pilot equipment such as required lockout/tagout LOTO procedures, operator training, or third-party inspection certificates

Prepare Procurement Packages and Vendor RFI/RFPs

• Please indicate which contract model you prefer for procurement packages such as design-bid-build, design-build, or performance-based contracting Options: Design-bid-build, Design-build, Performance-based, Unsure
• Enumerate mandatory vendor qualifications or certifications needed in RFI or RFPs such as ISO certifications, ASME compliance, or experience with industrial boilers
• Supply a list of long-lead items that must be included in vendor RFIs to obtain accurate lead times
• Please select required deliverables from vendors such as detailed bills of materials, commissioning plans, and spare parts lists Options: Bills of materials, Commissioning plan, Spare parts list, Testing and inspection plan
• Do you require pre-qualification of vendors through a questionnaire before issuing an RFP? Options: Yes, pre-qualify vendors, No pre-qualification, Only for critical packages
• Outline your preferred contract award criteria and weighting such as 40% technical, 40% commercial, 20% schedule

• Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA)
• Master Services Agreement (MSA)
• Statement of Work (SOW)
• Data Processing Agreement (DPA)
• Data Access Authorization
• Fee Schedule & Payment Terms
• Project Governance & Change Control

• Obtain written acceptance sign-off for the emissions baselining report
• Obtain written acceptance sign-off for the marginal abatement cost curve (MACC) and abatement modeling
• Obtain written acceptance sign-off for the prioritized implementation roadmap
• Deliver final financial models and source files and confirm buyer access
• Close or obtain written acceptance of all open findings and action items
• Obtain operations/HSE sign-off on site-level deliverables and implementation safety requirements
• Obtain compliance owner sign-off on regulatory/permitting preconditions or documented exceptions
• Receive written confirmation of final commercial acceptance to trigger billing milestone
• Handover sustain & improve package and confirm governance owners

• Post-Delivery Health Check
• First Measurement Review
• 90-Day Implementation Progress Review
• Quarterly Operational Review
• Annual Impact and Continuous Improvement Review

• Publish the quarterly metrics report and update the public roadmap tracker with the latest milestone statuses.
• Confirm updated milestone dates and any necessary reprioritization to preserve year-to-date impact.
• Publish the updated roadmap milestone register showing revised dates and dependencies.
• Record each critical blocker in the issue tracker with the required resolution steps and target dates.
• Produce a short funding gap summary for any projects lacking approved capital and circulate for decision.
• Quarterly metrics snapshot
• Confirm the quarter-to-date Scope 1 emissions trajectory and whether it aligns with the rolling plan.
• Reduce the active blocker backlog by agreeing closure actions for at least 50% of current critical items.
• Decide which enhancement requests will enter the implementation queue next quarter.
• Reconfirm deliverable ownership and acceptance context
• Create implementation tickets for approved enhancement requests with target start dates.
• Close or reclassify any stale issues in the blocker register and document reason for closure.
• Revisit Engagement Scope targets and annual commitments
• Validate the year-to-date cumulative tCO2e reduction against the Engagement Scope expectations.
• Confirm the percent of prioritized initiatives that closed with capital approved, and surface any systemic funding barriers.
• Agree a short list of operational and funding improvements to enhance next-year realization.
• Publish the annual impact pack containing emissions reductions, financial metrics, and variance analysis.
• Document and schedule the agreed continuous improvement items with target owners and timelines.
• Prepare a funding gap and capital prioritization brief for the next budgeting cycle if required.
• Confirm all data feeds required to run the roadmap modeling are connected and producing expected samples.
• Identify and document any blockers that must be resolved before the first outcome measurement window.
• Agree completion dates for remediation actions that will enable the first measurement.
• Produce a short remediation plan listing each blocker, the verification step, and target completion date.
• Deliver a sample extract of Scope 1 and Scope 2 data for verification against the baselined figures.
• Enable access to the implementation roadmap tracker for named operational users.
• Restate targets recorded in Engagement Scope
• Establish whether Scope 1 monthly emissions are tracking toward the Engagement Scope targets or require remediation.
• Confirm the percent of prioritized abatement projects with named owners and approved funding, and identify funding gaps to address.
• Document a timebound corrective plan with verification checkpoints for the next review.
• Publish the measurement dashboard export showing Scope 1 monthly emissions and project owner/funding status for the prior period.
• Create a remediation tracker entry for each off-target metric with the required steps to return to plan.
• Schedule follow-up technical or funding detailed review sessions where root causes require more analysis.
• Confirm the targets recorded in Engagement Scope and scope of this review
• Validate the cumulative projected annual CO2e reduction committed under the roadmap against Engagement Scope targets.
• Reduce the count of critical blockers by agreeing remediation steps and target dates for clearance.
• Validate data feeds and baseline integrity
• Year-to-date impact and financial summary
• Present cumulative committed CO2e reduction and milestone status
• Present first measurement data
• Detailed review on any persistent underperforming sites or programs
• Enhancement requests and scope changes
• Review open implementation blockers
• Lessons learned from implemented projects
• Diagnosis of gaps and root causes
• Early adoption and operational readiness signals
• Issue closure and backlog management
• Open issues and immediate blockers
• Agree corrective actions and timelines
• Agree continuous improvement priorities for next year
• Agree remediation and contingency steps
• Agree immediate remediation actions
• Confirm readiness for ongoing cadence
• Update roadmap priorities and timing