Every factor we use carries a source and a date, visible in the tool and cited on the report. Anyone qualified who picks up one of our reports can trace every figure back to where it came from.
Ask a contractor for a booth footprint and you usually get one of three things: nothing, a number with no method behind it, or a certificate for something else entirely.
The problem is not dishonesty. Measuring a booth properly requires a factor for every material by weight, a density to get from a drawing to a weight, an end-of-life route, a freight distance and mode, crew travel, hotel nights and screen energy. That is a database, not a spreadsheet, and building one takes years. We built one, which is why we can show a client a figure and then show them where each part of it came from.
Material factors with named sources. Most come from the Inventory of Carbon and Energy database and the UK Government GHG conversion factor sets, with manufacturer Environmental Product Declarations where they exist. Every row carries its source and the date it was last checked.
Two tiers for the same material. This is the part that does the work. A material has a standard factor and a responsibly-sourced variant, and the difference is often the whole argument.
| Material | Standard | Certified or recycled |
|---|---|---|
| Brass | 4.80 | 1.20 |
| Copper | 3.81 | 0.84 |
| Nylon 6 | 7.92 | 1.58 |
| Polyester fabric | 14.20 | 2.00 |
| Polypropylene | 4.49 | 3.19 |
| Polycarbonate | 7.62 | 6.10 |
kg CO2e per kg. The same object in the same material from a different source can be 80 percent lower, and that is a design-stage decision at no extra cost.
An amortisation rate per material, which is how reuse changes the number rather than being asserted. Metals and glass at 100. Timber and sheet material at 25. Carpet, laminate and fabric at 5. PVC and vinyl film at 1. A frame that lasts a decade and a graphic that lasts one show are not the same purchase, and the maths should say so.
Travel, hotels and energy. Twenty-two passenger travel modes. Hotel night at 11.5 kg CO2e. UK grid electricity at 0.19553 kg CO2e per kWh. Screen energy from wattage by hours by show days.
End of life by route. Reuse at zero. Recycling and waste-to-energy at 0.0064 kg CO2e per kg. Landfill at 0.52. The gap between those is why we ask what happens to the kit afterwards.
Freight by mode. HGV diesel at 0.89121 kg CO2e per km. The same lorry on HVO at 0.01273. Cargo ship at 0.01321. Short-haul freight flight at 1.27835. On one project where we switched the fuel we avoided nearly 15 tonnes across 6,028 litres of HVO.
Straight-line distance understates road distance, and we note that on the report rather than letting it flatter the number. Freight assumes one lorry up to 100 square metres and two above, a rule of thumb disclosed as one. Screen energy assumes eight hours a day.
The caveat on every report, in these words: indicative estimate, in-house methodology, not independently audited.
We say it because it is accurate, and because anyone who does not is either genuinely audited, in which case they will show you the certificate, or hoping you do not ask. Independent verification of the method is something we are costing.
On a show floor, a photograph and a few questions gives an indicative carbon and cost figure in under two minutes. Enough to tell you whether there is a conversation worth having.
When you share your design files, we produce the full assessment: a branded report inside seven days, with a methodology page naming the author and citing every factor used.
The tool behind it is TIM, which we built, grounded in more than a thousand booths analysed over fifteen years across the agencies our founder has run. Part of that dataset came from suppliers and organisers who shared their numbers on condition we never publish their names. No competitor has a dataset like it, which is why no competitor can benchmark you against anything.
Worth saying plainly, because the industry oversells this. Moving from a custom build to modular, with local sourcing, finds around 75 percent on a good day. Anyone quoting 90 percent or more has a modelling error, not a better method. We test our own outputs against that rather than publishing whatever the model says.
CBRE's ICSC programme, published with the client's agreement: 39,912 kg CO2e in 2023, 13,322 kg in 2024, 12,613 kg in 2025. A 68 percent reduction on the same programme for the same client, with intensity falling from 2.66 to 0.84 kg CO2e per square foot. For Pernod Ricard we built the life cycle analysis tool they still use: 681 projects, a 51 percent reduction, more than 411 tonnes avoided.
Carbon in a booth is mostly material and freight. Material and freight are mostly what you are paying for. Where we see high carbon we tend to also see high cost, and the reverse. That is why measurement pays for itself rather than being a reporting overhead, and why the finance team is often more interested in the report than the sustainability team.
If your business has no physical product, your trade show programme may sit in your top ten scope 3 categories and has probably never been measured. We say "may" because it is a hypothesis we test per client.
Material by material, by weight, using factors from named sources with dates. Then freight by mode and distance, crew travel, hotel nights, screen energy and end-of-life route. Reuse is handled through a per-material amortisation rate rather than asserted.
No. They are indicative, produced with our own in-house methodology, and we print that on every report. Independent verification is something we are costing.
Figures are indicative, produced with our own in-house methodology and not independently audited. Third-party verification can be arranged on any project.
You will get an indicative carbon and cost figure back, and a full assessment inside seven days if you share the design files. No cost, no obligation.
Get in touch