Direct emissions
14,222
tCO2e
Back to search resultsEmissions
Sustainability
Scope
REPORTED REPORTED REPORTED REPORTED REPORTED REPORTED REPORTED REPORTED REPORTED REPORTED ESTIMATED REPORTED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED REPORTED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED 
Read the full scoring methodologyOur white paper covers exactly how the Mycelium Score and Transparency Score are calculated, including the normalisation process and what earns a 10/10.Download the white paper (PDF)
Explore carbon emissions data for Fater Group. Mycelium helps you review reported emissions, disclosure status, Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 data, climate targets and sustainability information in one company profile.
This profile brings together available carbon emissions data for Fater Group, including reported figures, modelled estimates, disclosure documents and sustainability indicators, so you can review its emissions and compare its performance against similar companies. It is one entry in the Mycelium emissions database. Read how we source and check this data.
Emissions
Carbon emissions
Total yearly emissions across all scopes
1,390,591tCO2e(Market Based)(Mycelium adjusted)
- Reported by Fater Group
- 577,202 tCO₂e
- Estimated by Mycelium
- 813,389 tCO₂e
Fater Group reported 42% of the adjusted total. Mycelium estimated the remaining 58% for the categories it did not disclose.
Scope 1
tCO2e
14,222
Scope 2 (Market Based)
tCO2e
30,980
Scope 3 total
tCO2e
1,345,389
Figures from pages 83 and 84 of the source report
Scope 3 reported
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
Something wrong? Contribute to this dataset
See the scope breakdownProvenance
Emissions
Factors
0.372kgCO2e / $
Supplier specific emission factors (kgCO2e / $)
Modelled
Reported
UpstreamScope 1, 2 + upstream Scope 3
0.372
0.372
Total+ all Scope 3
–
0.515
Per US dollar of revenue. Mycelium models the upstream factor only.
Which figure should I use?
Estimating your own supply-chain emissions from spend with this company? Use Upstream Modelled. The GHG Protocol defines purchased-goods emissions as cradle-to-gate, which means this company's own operations plus its upstream supply chain. Any of those emissions the company has not disclosed are filled with modelled estimates, so a transparent company is not unfairly penalised against one that simply has not reported.
Looking at what the company filed itself? Use the Reported column. Total Reported also includes downstream emissions, such as the lifetime use of the products this company sells, which the GHG Protocol attributes to the users of those products rather than to customers buying goods and services.
Reported counts only emissions the company has filed itself. A blank or low Reported cell does not mean those emissions do not exist, just that the company has not disclosed them. When Upstream Reported sits close to Upstream Modelled, that is a positive signal: the company has disclosed most of its upstream emissions.
Sustainability
Snapshot
Based on reported data, retrieved with AI
- Fater Group reported 577,202 tCO₂e in 2024.
- Scope 3 accounted for 92% of reported emissions.
- Reported across 9 of 15 GHG Protocol Scope 3 categories.
- Scope 2 reported under the market based methodology.
According to available emissions disclosures, Fater Group reported total yearly emissions of 577,202 tCO₂e in 2024. Scope 3 emissions accounted for 92% of the reported footprint, indicating supply chain activity, purchased goods and services, business travel, and wider operational dependencies were the most significant contributors to the company's carbon footprint.
The company achieved a Mycelium Score of 2.3, placing it below average for its sector for sustainability performance, and received a transparency score of 73.9, meaning they share a fair amount, though with some gaps along the way.
Scope
breakdown
Scope 1 emissions
Direct emissions from sources the company owns or controls, such as fuel use, facilities and vehicles.
Scope 2 emissions
Indirect emissions from purchased energy, including electricity, heating and cooling.
Location based
16,803
tCO2eMarket based USED IN TOTAL
30,980
tCO2eScope 3 emissions
Wider value chain emissions across the 15 GHG Protocol categories, from purchased goods and business travel to investments, where reported.
Cat 1
Purchased goods & services
298,000
tCO2eCat 2
Capital goods
6,000
tCO2eCat 3
Fuel & energy related activities
14,000
tCO2eCat 4
Upstream transportation & distribution
51,000
tCO2eCat 5
Waste generated in operations
500
tCO2eCat 6
Business travel
300
tCO2eCat 7
Employee commuting
2,000
tCO2eCat 8
Upstream leased assets
797
tCO2eCat 9
Downstream transportation & distribution
14,000
tCO2eCat 10
Processing of sold products
30,458
tCO2eCat 11
Use of sold products
769,117
tCO2eCat 12
End-of-life treatment of sold products
146,000
tCO2eCat 13
Downstream leased assets
890
tCO2eCat 14
Franchises
3,796
tCO2eCat 15
Investments
8,531
tCO2e6 values were derived via Mycelium's normalisation process rather than reported by the company. A cell marked “ESTIMATED” is a figure the company did not disclose, modelled by Mycelium.
Verification
Independent third parties involved in checking or preparing Fater Group's emissions data.
Independent assurance
Independently assured(limited assurance)by BDO Italia S.p.A.for 2024
Climate targets
Science Based Targets initiative
Near-term target
Targets set (1.5°C), target year 2030
Long-term target
Targets set, target year 2040
Net zero
Targets set, target year 2040
Source: Science Based Targets initiative, Companies Taking Action.
Contact Info
Website
www.fatergroup.comCountry
Italy
Browse carbon emissions data by industry
Jump straight into the sectors users explore most, or view all industries.
How scoring works
How the Mycelium Score is calculated
The Mycelium Score is out of 10. Up to 6.5 points reflect carbon intensity vs peers in the same NACE section (emissions normalised against revenue, log-scaled between the 5th and 95th percentile of each company's latest reporting year in that section; a section needs at least 5 companies to be benchmarked). The band above 6.5 is earned through verified data quality on a claimed profile: declaring every reporting category yourself (up to 2.0), preparation by a carbon accountant (2.0) and independently audited figures (2.0). The total is multiplied by the transparency score and capped at 10. A disclosure with an implausibly large figure (Scope 1 or 2 over 300 million tonnes, a Scope 3 figure over 2 billion tonnes or a total over 2.5 billion tonnes) is not scored until it has been checked.
A higher score means lower carbon intensity than sector peers, backed by data that's third-party verified, claimed by the company, and fully disclosed. Fater Group's score sits at the top of this page and in the score panel. Without a revenue figure to measure carbon intensity, or an industry classification to compare it within, a company has no score.
How the Transparency Score is calculated
The Transparency Score is the share of a company's estimated footprint that it reported itself, graded from A (very high) down to F (very low). Where a category is missing, Mycelium models what it would hold for a company of that size and industry and counts it as undisclosed, so an unreported category where the bulk of emissions sit hurts far more than a minor one. Unreported downstream categories (9 to 15) count at a quarter of their modelled size in this share; the carbon intensity behind the score still counts them in full. A Scope 3 total filed without a category breakdown earns very little credit for the part left unattributed, because it does not show which categories are inside it: a company can count business travel, leave purchased goods out entirely, and the total looks the same. Without a revenue figure the footprint cannot be modelled, so the company has no Transparency Score.
For Fater Group, the single biggest gap is Use of sold products (Scope 3 Category 11). Mycelium estimates it accounts for around 55% of the company's estimated footprint, yet it hasn't been disclosed. Leaving a bucket this large unreported is what's holding the transparency score down.
In total, roughly 59% of Fater Group's estimated emissions sit in categories it hasn't reported. Disclosing these would be the fastest way to raise the transparency score.
Read the full scoring methodologyOur white paper covers exactly how the Mycelium Score and Transparency Score are calculated, including the normalisation process and what earns a 10/10.Download the white paper (PDF)Compare Fater Group with similar companies
Fater Group carbon emissions FAQs
What are Fater Group's carbon emissions?
In its 2024 reporting year, Fater Group disclosed total emissions of 577,202 tCO2e across all scopes. Including Mycelium estimates for undisclosed categories, the adjusted total is 1,390,591 tCO2e. Scope 3 accounted for the largest share of the reported total, around 92%.
Does Fater Group report Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 emissions?
For 2024, Fater Group's available disclosure covers Scope 1 (14,222 tCO2e), Scope 2 (30,980 tCO2e) and Scope 3 across 9 of the 15 GHG Protocol categories. Figures not reported by the company are shown as modelled estimates and labelled as such.
How transparent is Fater Group's emissions reporting?
Fater Group has a Mycelium transparency score of 73.9 out of 100. The score is the share of the company's estimated footprint that it reported itself, so an undisclosed category where most of its emissions sit weighs far more than a minor one.
Is Fater Group sustainable?
Mycelium measures sustainability through carbon emissions data rather than giving a yes or no verdict. Fater Group has a Mycelium Score of 2.3 out of 10, which reflects its emissions intensity against sector peers together with how transparent and well-verified its reporting is. The emissions figures, disclosure documents and climate targets on this page give the fuller picture.
Is Fater Group environmentally friendly?
Carbon emissions are one measurable part of environmental impact, and the part Mycelium tracks. Fater Group disclosed 577,202 tCO2e for 2024, and its Mycelium Score of 2.3 out of 10 shows how that performance compares with similar companies in its sector.
Learn more about our methodology and where this data comes from.