Keeping Coatsink Carbon Neutral – 2025

It’s that time of year again! June 2025 marks the end of our round four corporate carbon footprint (CCF) calculation and contribution to our new chosen climate action projects, also known as our financial climate contributions (previously known as offsetting).
We’re carbon neutral for another year! 

Scope 2 vs Scope 3

We now have four years worth of data to compare…

Our round 4 carbon footprint has increased quite significantly compared to previous years but our distribution of scope 2 vs scope 3 emission sources has remained stable. Scope 2 are indirect emissions associated with the purchase and consumption of electricity, steam, heat and cooling for our studio operations, and remain consistently low. The vast majority of our emissions always come from scope 3 sources which encompass all other indirect emissions which are not under our direct control including, for example, emissions from the use of our products by our customers and our purchased goods and services. (t= tonnes of CO₂ equivalent, rounded to the nearest whole number).

Scope 3 Comparisons

A comparison of our scope 3 emission sources shows that whilst the largest source categories, or hot spots, (highlighted in red), are generally very similar across the calculations, the actual tonnes associated with these hot spots can vary quite significantly. (Round 1 has been excluded from further comparisons as a result of its uniqueness – covid, no studio, no commuting, no events etc. An indepth comparison of rounds 2 and 3 can be found in our 2024 roundup. Once again tonnes of CO₂e, or ‘t’, has been rounded to the nearest whole number).

*Operational waste was omitted in error in Round 3 but subsequently accounted for in Round 4 to make up for the oversight.

Hot Spots

Flights

In round 4 our biggest emission source, by a significant margin, is flights. In round 3, flights were our second biggest hot spot while in round 2, flights were absent as a continuing effect of covid. In last year’s analysis we anticipated the upwards trend in flights to continue as a result in increased business opportunities and events post covid.

Looking at the data a little deeper however, despite the increased tonnes of CO₂e associated with our flights in round 4, we actually took significantly more flights in round 3 (83) compared to round 4 (51). So what accounts for the increase in t CO₂e? The number of transatlantic flights was similar (round 3 = 25, round 4 = 27), however, the number of business and first class flights, as opposed to economy flights, was significantly higher in round 4 (round 3 business / first class = 12, round 4 business / first class = 30) and the number of business and first class transatlantic flights was significantly higher in round 4 (round 3 = 4, round 4 = 18). This is a striking demonstration of the impact of transatlantic and premium class flights; economy class, with its significantly less space and extras, requires less fuel and therefore has a much reduced carbon footprint.

Home Office Electricity / Commuting

Emissions data regarding commuting and home offices is gathered through an optional survey which we ask our staff to complete. The data gathered through the survey is then extrapolated out based on our average number of employees and freelances during the period, and the number of working days in the year and average number of holidays per person, in order to reach the average number of working days per person. Due to the significant differences in sample size (round 3 = 108 respondents / round 4 = 55 respondents) the extrapolations are an estimate as opposed to a completely accurate picture. For this reason, making comparisons between the different rounds and drawing any accurate conclusions is more difficult.

This round we extended our survey extrapolations to include not only our employees but also our freelancers. This, combined with a small increase in staff numbers, meant that our team size, and therefore our potential sample size, had increased by 31 members. We would expect then that our commuting and home office figures should have increased but we can see from the data that home office electricity usage between round 3 and 4 has remained the same and staff commuting has reduced significantly. 

For the reasons noted above, it’s difficult to make any meaningful interpretations of the data. Going forward we could make the completion of the (very short) survey mandatory, as opposed to optional, in order that we have a much more complete and representative sample, reducing the need for such widespread extrapolations and assisting us in understanding the data.

External Data Centres

Our third largest emission source for round 4 is external data centres which includes storage services such as Google, GitHub, Slack, and Dropbox, and also our game data including our customer game downloads and player user data. While our data storage has remained fairly consistent (round 2 = 15.1TB / round 3 = 20.6TB / round 4 = 18.6TB), our game data has shifted dramatically.

Emissions associated with our game downloads peaked in round 2 (3,451TB) and dropped notably in round 3 (689TB). Our 2024 data review examines this decrease in more detail and notes that two of our games were early in their release in round 2 and were free to download so, as a result, downloads were significant. By round 3, those games were no longer free to download and figures were more representative of the tail end of sales.

Our round 4 game downloads data (1,657TB) has more than doubled since round 3 but is still less than half that of round 2. A key reason for this increase between rounds 3 and 4 was as a result of a number of our games being included in a subscription service during round 4, making such games free for subscribers to download from a large catalogue and accounting for a big bump in downloads. This alone accounts for over half of the difference with the rest being, at least in part, as a result of smaller fluctuations in sales.

As noted last year, unpredictable and varying sales means the impact of game data on our footprint is hard to anticipate and susceptible to significant fluctuation making it a particularly interesting area to monitor.

Upstream Emissions Electricity

Upstream emissions for electricity refer to the emissions that occur before the electricity reaches the end user. They encompass the entire lifecycle of electricity generation, including fuel extraction, processing, transportation, and the power plant’s emissions. These emissions are distinct from downstream emissions, which occur when the end user consumes the electricity.

Upstream electricity emissions continue to be a hot spot for us as a result of the significant portion of our footprint which comes from our game data and therefore the electricity required to download and play our products.

Operational Waste

Operational waste refers to the overall waste generated from our studio operations and its transport to disposal facilities. It’s calculated using average consumption methodology based on number of employees and office size in square metres. Emission factors derived from the UK Government’s National Energy Efficiency Data Framework, Water Key Performance Indicators, and other peer-reviewed research are applied to estimate the average waste generated per employee per year. The default distance for an average transport to a disposal facility of 25km is then applied.

The category was included in round 2 but omitted, in error, in round 3. As a consequence we accounted for round 3 and 4 operational waste emissions in round 4. Operational waste emission factors have, however, decreased over time with the average per-employee waste declining compared to round 2 levels. As a result, even when compensating for two rounds of operational waste, our round 4 emissions are very similar to that of round 2.

The reduction in emission factors could be attributed to several factors:
– Implementation of the EU landfill directive restricting biodegradable waste in landfills
– Significant shift toward recycling and waste recovery
– Technological advancements in methane capture
– Investments in waste management infrastructure
– Promotion of circular economy principles

Going forward, our operational waste should remain fairly stable over time if we assume that both the size of our studio and the number of staff working from the studio remains consistent.

Financial Climate Contributions

Following our previous trend, we have once again doubled the amount of our financial climate contribution, covering 200% (549t CO₂e) of our emissions. We’ve chosen to invest in three different projects: a renewable energy project in Asia, and two combined projects which contribute to the financing of a certified climate project, alongside an additional commitment: a tree planting project in the UK and a worldwide ocean protection project. Follow the links to learn more about the projects and Coatsink’s contributions to them, and to download our financial climate contribution certificates.

As always, thank you to everyone who was involved this round.