Tetra Pak’s FY25 Sustainability Report Shows Significant GHG Emissions Cuts

Tetra Pak reports 34% value-chain emissions cut since 2019

Tetra Pak has published its 27th annual sustainability report, showing a 34% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions across its value chain since 2019. The packaging manufacturer also reported a 56% cut in emissions from its own operations and 97% renewable energy consumption across facilities in 2025. The company says these results keep it on track for a 46% value-chain emissions reduction by 2030 and net-zero by 2050.

The FY25 report was released on 8 June 2026. It frames emission reductions as part of wider efforts to strengthen food system resilience, particularly through climate and nature risk assessment. For UK businesses, the report offers a clear example of how large manufacturers are approaching Scope 3 reporting and supply-chain decarbonisation at scale.

Tetra Pak’s progress sits within a broader trend. Packaging and processing companies are increasingly linking carbon targets to supply-chain stability, energy security, and circular economy planning. Consequently, their reporting now extends beyond simple climate metrics into operational risk management and commercial continuity.

Performance data published in the FY25 sustainability report

The report provides detailed figures covering emissions, energy use, and long-term targets. Total value-chain emissions have fallen 34% from the 2019 baseline, while operational emissions dropped 56% over the same period. Renewable energy now accounts for 97% of consumption across Tetra Pak’s facilities.

Looking ahead, the company has committed to 100% renewable electricity across all operations by 2030. This sits alongside the 46% value-chain reduction target for the same year. Both goals feed into the company’s ultimate net-zero commitment for 2050. These timelines align with Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) frameworks, which many large suppliers now follow to meet customer and investor expectations.

However, separate performance data on Tetra Pak’s corporate website shows slightly different percentage reductions. Those pages cite a 25% reduction in total value-chain emissions and a 54% cut in operational emissions since 2019. The difference likely reflects reporting scope, metric definitions, or timing. Annual reports typically present the latest consolidated view, while corporate pages may update at different intervals or use alternative calculation boundaries.

This variation highlights a practical challenge for procurement teams. Suppliers often publish sustainability data in multiple formats, making direct comparison difficult. Therefore, businesses need to establish clear definitions when evaluating supplier performance or setting contract requirements. Asking which baseline, scope, and methodology a supplier uses can prevent confusion later.

How food sector emissions reporting connects to UK supply chains

Tetra Pak’s report emphasises food system resilience, linking emissions cuts to supply-chain stability and energy transition. For UK food manufacturers, retailers, and hospitality businesses, this framing has direct commercial relevance. Packaging is often a significant contributor to Scope 3 emissions, particularly in categories like purchased goods and upstream transport.

Moreover, public sector contracts increasingly require suppliers to demonstrate credible carbon reduction plans. PPN 06/21, the government’s procurement policy note on carbon reduction, applies to central government contracts above £5 million per year. Suppliers must publish a carbon reduction plan and commit to net-zero by 2050. While Tetra Pak operates at a different scale, the principles are identical. Businesses across the supply chain now face similar expectations from customers, investors, and regulators.

Furthermore, packaging sustainability affects waste obligations under the extended producer responsibility (EPR) reforms introduced in England from 2024. Companies that handle packaging must report volumes, pay fees based on material type, and meet recycling targets. Tetra Pak’s investment in collection, sorting, and recycling infrastructure reflects this regulatory environment. UK businesses using carton packaging need to understand their own EPR obligations and how supplier activities support compliance.

Energy costs also matter. Tetra Pak’s shift to renewable electricity mirrors what many UK manufacturers are considering or already implementing. Rising gas and electricity prices since 2021 have made energy efficiency and renewable procurement a financial priority, not just an environmental one. Businesses that can demonstrate progress on energy transition may also benefit from preferential finance rates or insurance terms as climate risk assessment becomes standard practice.

What the latest figures show about packaging sector emissions

A 34% value-chain reduction over six years represents substantial progress. However, the bulk of emissions in packaging manufacturing typically sit in Scope 3 categories such as raw materials, transport, and end-of-life treatment. Tetra Pak’s figures suggest the company is addressing emissions beyond its own factory gates, which is essential for meaningful carbon accounting.

Operational emissions fell faster, at 56%, driven largely by renewable energy adoption. This pattern is common. Direct emissions from owned facilities (Scope 1) and purchased electricity (Scope 2) are easier to control than supply-chain emissions. Therefore, companies often make faster progress in these areas. Renewable electricity contracts, on-site solar, and fuel switching deliver quick percentage gains.

Nevertheless, Scope 3 remains the larger challenge. For food packaging, this includes emissions from forestry and pulp production, polymer manufacture, transport networks, and post-consumer waste. Consequently, value-chain reductions require collaboration with suppliers, logistics providers, and waste management systems. UK businesses evaluating supplier performance should ask how Scope 3 reductions are being delivered, not just whether targets exist.

Tetra Pak’s 2030 target of 46% value-chain reduction aligns with science-based pathways for limiting global temperature rise to 1.5°C. Many large buyers now expect suppliers to adopt similar targets. In practice, this means UK businesses may face requests from customers to set their own science-based targets or demonstrate equivalent ambition. Understanding what credible targets look like helps companies respond effectively.

Core facts from Tetra Pak’s FY25 sustainability report

• Value-chain emissions reduced by 34% since 2019, with operational emissions down 56% over the same period.
• Renewable energy consumption reached 97% across Tetra Pak facilities in 2025.
• The company targets 100% renewable electricity by 2030 and a 46% value-chain emissions cut by the same year.
• Tetra Pak published an integrated climate and nature risk assessment in 2025 to guide future strategy.
• The FY25 report is the company’s 27th annual sustainability disclosure, released on 8 June 2026.

Why emissions reporting matters for UK manufacturers and suppliers

Large customers increasingly expect detailed carbon data from suppliers. This includes not only total emissions but also reduction trajectories, methodologies, and third-party verification. Carbon reduction plans aligned with PPN 06/21 are now standard for public sector supply, and similar expectations are spreading into private contracts.

Similarly, tender processes for major retailers, hospitality groups, and food manufacturers often include sustainability scoring. Suppliers that can demonstrate credible progress on Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions gain competitive advantage. Conversely, businesses without clear data or reduction plans may find themselves excluded from future opportunities. This dynamic is reshaping procurement across the food sector.

Environmental reporting is also moving towards mandatory disclosure. The UK government has introduced the Streamlined Energy and Carbon Reporting (SECR) framework, which requires large companies to report energy use and emissions annually. Meanwhile, listed companies must align with the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) recommendations. Although these rules focus on larger organisations, supply-chain pressure means SMEs are increasingly asked to provide equivalent data.

Businesses that start measuring and reporting emissions early can spread the cost and complexity over time. Those that wait may face urgent customer requests without systems in place to respond. Therefore, developing a basic carbon footprint and reduction plan now reduces future risk. Support for carbon reporting and ESG compliance can help businesses establish credible baselines and meet emerging requirements.

Broader sustainability strategy beyond carbon metrics

Tetra Pak’s report also references continued investment in packaging collection, sorting, and recycling infrastructure. This reflects the circular economy focus now embedded in UK waste policy. Extended producer responsibility reforms mean businesses that place packaging on the market must take greater responsibility for end-of-life management. Consequently, companies are investing in systems to recover and reprocess materials.

For UK businesses, this has practical implications. Choosing packaging suppliers with established recycling partnerships can simplify EPR compliance and reduce fees. Materials that are widely collected and recycled typically attract lower EPR costs than those requiring specialist treatment. Therefore, packaging decisions now carry financial consequences beyond purchase price.

Additionally, nature-related risk is gaining attention alongside climate. Tetra Pak’s integrated climate and nature assessment reflects growing awareness that environmental risks are interconnected. Deforestation, water stress, and biodiversity loss all affect supply-chain resilience. UK businesses reliant on agricultural or forestry-based materials should consider how suppliers manage these risks, particularly as disclosure frameworks like the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD) develop.

Supply-chain transparency is also becoming a competitive factor. Customers and investors want to understand where materials come from and how they are produced. Suppliers that can demonstrate responsible sourcing, traceability, and environmental stewardship are better positioned for long-term partnerships. This trend is particularly strong in food and consumer goods sectors, where brand reputation depends on supply-chain integrity.

Government guidance on carbon reporting and climate disclosure

The UK government provides detailed guidance on greenhouse gas reporting through the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero. Businesses can access reporting frameworks, conversion factors, and calculation tools via the government’s GHG conversion factors, which are updated annually to reflect best practice.

For companies navigating PPN 06/21 requirements, the Cabinet Office procurement policy guidance explains what carbon reduction plans must include and how they are assessed in tender processes. This resource is essential for any business supplying central government or considering public sector contracts.

Environmental reporting obligations under SECR and TCFD are detailed on the government’s environmental reporting guidance page. This covers who must report, what data to include, and how to structure disclosures. Even businesses below mandatory thresholds may find the frameworks useful for voluntary reporting.

Industry bodies such as the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) offer additional resources on carbon management and sustainability strategy. Training on carbon measurement and reporting can help teams develop the skills needed to meet customer expectations and regulatory requirements effectively.