Good Wool Collective
Sign in

Carbon Emissions

Why wool’s carbon footprint is hard to pin down

An estimated 75 to 85 per cent of wool’s value-chain emissions arise on the farm: methane from the sheep’s digestion, nitrous oxide from urine and manure, land use, supplementary feed and on-farm energy. Footprints are calculated by life cycle assessment (LCA) and depend heavily on the data and method chosen. In early 2026, figures for greasy wool at the farm gate ranged from about 25 to 70 kg of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) per kilo, and two neighbouring farms can differ more than two countries.

One choice weighs heavily: allocation, which splits a farm’s impact between meat, wool and other products. The EU’s rules split it on a biological basis. In 2025, France’s environmental cost score split it by economic value instead, assigning 37 per cent of farming impact to its default wool and 4 per cent to underutilised wool. By 2026 the wool sector was pointing out that ISO standards prefer a biological basis first, and that a split by price moves with the market.

In late 2024 the wool sector’s concern was the EU’s Product Environmental Footprint (PEF) method, its weak wool data and its narrow view of durability. By late 2025 the Commission had accepted better wool datasets and approved PEF’s rules for apparel and footwear as a voluntary method. In January 2026 the GHG Protocol’s Land Sector and Removals Standard let companies account for carbon removed on farms for the first time, reported separately from emissions. This is general guidance, not legal advice.

Key takeaways for brands

  • Ask which dataset and which allocation method sit behind any wool footprint you are given, and expect the method to be reported alongside the number.
  • Collect enough primary data from your farms to show the effect of the changes you make; near-perfect emissions figures every year are not needed to start.
  • Report any carbon removals from farms separately from emissions, allocate them the same way as the emissions, and do not offset them against emissions elsewhere in your value chain.
  • Build traceability to a sourcing region or to farms, and long-term farm relationships, before relying on removals: stored carbon must be monitored, and any loss reported as a reversal.
  • Fill in as many optional parameters as you can when calculating France’s environmental cost score; fields left blank fall back on conservative defaults that raise the score.

Topical questions

Why do carbon footprints for wool differ so much between databases?
If the published numbers are not reliable, what can a brand do?
Does regenerative or organic wool score differently?
Can carbon taken up on a farm offset emissions elsewhere in the value chain?
Can a brand report the carbon stored in its wool garments?
How can a brand show that its wool qualifies as underutilised wool in France’s environmental cost score?
Will durability count, and how can a wool garment’s lifespan be estimated?
Is the EU’s PEF method now in force, and what does it mean for claims?

Watch Related Sessions

Session · 25 March 2026

The Latest on Wool Emissions

This session explores the complexities of measuring and reducing wool’s carbon footprint, including the latest standards, methodologies, and innovative practices in lower-impact wool production. Experts discuss how brands can implement effective strategies for environmental impact reduction and transparent reporting.

The session