Spreadsheets were a reasonable starting point. When event carbon reporting was new, building your own tracker felt pragmatic: you controlled the methodology, you could adjust it as you went, and you didn’t need to convince anyone to invest in new software.
For many teams,with what measuring emissions actually invol a spreadsheet was how they first got to grips ved and fun fact, TRACE actually started as a spreadsheet all those years ago now.
But the demands on event carbon data have shifted. Clients want comparable numbers. Regulations like the CSRD are raising the bar on what counts as verifiable. Internal teams are asking questions that a static file cannot reliably answer. And if you are managing more than one or two events a year, the spreadsheet that once felt manageable starts to show its limits quickly.
You need structure
Most teams using spreadsheets for carbon reporting are putting real work in. They’re committed, but the tool being used is not fit for purpose.
Spreadsheets are flexible by design and that’s useful for a lot of things, but for carbon measurement it creates structural problems:
- Manual entry creates error risk. Entering data into a spreadsheet means that you’re responsible for making sure everything adds up. Formula breaks, copy-paste mistakes, and version conflicts are routine in spreadsheet-based workflows. In carbon reporting, those errors compound and they are hard to trace after the fact.
- Different people apply different assumptions. Without a standardised structure, teams often make different calls about what to include, how to categorise activity, and which factors to apply. Across a programme of events, or across a team, this makes results inconsistent and difficult to compare.
- There is no audit trail. If a client or auditor asks how a figure was reached, a spreadsheet rarely provides a clean answer. Showing your working, which methodology was used, which boundaries were set, which data was estimated, is difficult when everything lives in a manually maintained file.
Why consistency matters more than you might think
One of the most valuable things event carbon data can do is show change over time. Are emissions improving across your event programme? Which categories are driving your footprint? Where should you be focusing reduction efforts?
Those questions can only be answered reliably when data is collected and calculated consistently, the same boundaries, methodology and emission factors event after event.
Industry data from the Temperature Check Europe 2025 report illustrates how unevenly this is being achieved across the sector. Energy data was captured in only around 57% of measured events. Waste data was recorded even less consistently. Audience travel data was recorded in only around 43% of events and where it was captured, it frequently covered only a proportion of actual journeys. These gaps are not just a measurement problem; they make year-on-year comparison unreliable, which limits how useful the data actually is for decision-making.
The reason consistency is hard to maintain in spreadsheets is largely structural. When a file is owned by one person, updated ad hoc, and not standardised across the organisation, each event effectively gets measured slightly differently. That makes it very difficult to produce data you can stand behind.
What clients and regulators are starting to expect
The bar for what counts as credible carbon data is rising. The CSRD requires companies to provide verifiable, auditable sustainability information.
The Green Claims Directive means that environmental claims, including those about events, need to be backed by evidence. Under the Green Claims Directive and UK Green Claims Code, fines for non-compliance with substantiation requirements can reach up to 10% of annual turnover.
Beyond regulation, 38% of leading event businesses are already measuring emissions, despite only 17% being legally required to report. The expectation that event suppliers and organisers can produce reliable emissions data is becoming a baseline requirement in client relationships and how you stack up against competition comes from how you use the data.
A spreadsheet can produce a number, but whether that number is accurate, consistent, and traceable enough to hold up to external scrutiny is a different question.
What a purpose-built carbon measurement platform does differently
Carbon measurement platforms are designed specifically to address the limitations that spreadsheets run into at scale. The core differences are structural:
- Emission factors are maintained and updated within the platform, so calculations are always based on current, relevant data without requiring manual intervention.
- Methodology is standardised across every event, methodology, categories and calculations are applied consistently, regardless of who is entering the data.
- Data entry is guided, reducing the scope for error and ensuring that the right information is collected in the right format from the outset.
- Results are auditable, with a clear record of what was measured, how, and what assumptions were applied, which is exactly what clients, leadership and regulators are increasingly asking for.
- Aggregated data becomes usable, because when every event is measured the same way, you can meaningfully compare results across your portfolio, spot trends, and identify where reductions will have the most impact.
What this means for event businesses specifically
For event businesses – agencies, venues, organisers, suppliers – carbon reporting typically sits across two distinct areas: the emissions generated by individual events, and the emissions from day-to-day business operations, which includes offices, utilities and staff commuting. Both matter, and both are increasingly required.
Historically, these have been measured separately, in different systems, with different methodologies and different levels of detail, which creates exactly the kind of inconsistency that makes reporting difficult to defend.
TRACE covers both. In addition to event carbon measurement, TRACE has launched Business Operations reporting, which allows event businesses to capture their operational emissions, such as electricity, gas, water, staff commuting, business travel and accommodation within the same platform. Operational and event data are kept distinct where that is appropriate, but can be connected where activity is specific to event delivery. That means one consistent reporting structure, rather than two separate processes producing data that is hard to reconcile.
The point is not to abandon what you have built
If your organisation has been measuring with a spreadsheet, that work is not wasted. The data you have collected has value, and the process of building a tracker will have given you a clearer sense of your boundaries, your data gaps, and where your biggest emission sources are.
The question is whether a spreadsheet can keep pace with what is being asked of event carbon data now, in terms of consistency, auditability, and the ability to generate insight rather than just a number. For most teams managing a programme of events, the honest answer is that it probably cannot.
Starting with a platform purpose-built for event carbon measurement means your data is defensible from day one. And as reporting expectations continue to rise, that is the foundation that matters.
Want to see how TRACE handles event carbon measurement and business operations reporting? Book a demo or start a free trial.
