How can
we advance
sustainability?
2024 Environmental
Sustainability Report
Data Fact Sheet
Reporting on our 2023 scal year
Environmental Data Fact Sheet 2024
02
Our environmental data
As part of Microsoft’s commitment to disclose information about our environmental footprint, the following
sections are a compilation of environmental metrics across greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, energy, water, waste
and circularity, and land. Section 1 presents greenhouse gas emissions in accordance with the GHG Protocol
and management’s criteria, and select environmental metrics that both reference the Global Reporting Initiative
(GRI) Standards and are reported in accordance with management’s criteria. Deloitte & Touche LLP performed a
review engagement on management’s assertion related to the specied information presented in Section 1 of this
Environmental Data Fact Sheet as of and for the scal year ended June 30, 2023 (FY23) and includes their review
report. Information relating to i) periods prior to the year ended June 30, 2023 (FY23), and ii) forward-looking
statements, goals, and progress against goals, were not subject to the review and, accordingly, Deloitte & Touche
LLP does not express a conclusion or any form of assurance on such information. Section 2 presents additional
environmental metrics that show detail and breakdowns and was not subject to Deloitte & Touche LLP’s review.
All reported values represent best available data at the time of publication. Data is adjusted to incorporate updated
methodology, structural changes, and/or accuracy improvements per our recalculation policy described herein.
Microsoft’s structural changes policy is to begin including data the year following a merger and/or acquisition.
Divestments will be reected on data associated to the year when they occurred. Additional detail on these changes
is included as footnotes where applicable.
Read our 2024 Environmental Sustainability Report
Environmental data contents
Section 1: Our environmental data
1.1 Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
Table 1a GHG emissions by scope (mtCO
2
e) 03
Table 1b GHG emissions by scope (mtCO
2
e) with management’s criteria 04
Table 2 GHG emissions by type 04
Table 3 GHG emissions by region (mtCO
2
e) 05
Table 4 GHG emissions intensity (mtCO
2
e/revenue $M) 05
Table 5 Carbon osets (mtCO
2
e) 05
1.2 Energy
Table 6 Energy consumption within the organization (MWh) 06
Table 7 Renewable energy metrics 06
Table 8 Energy intensity (MWh/revenue $M) 06
1.3 Water
Table 9 Water and euents (megaliters) 06
1.4 Waste and circularity
Table 10 Operational waste generated, diverted, and directed to disposal (metric tons) 07
Table 11 Product packaging circularity metrics 07
1.5 Ecosystems
Table 12 Land protection 07
1.6 Management’s assertion 08
1.7 Description of the company and inventory boundary 08
1.8 Information on metrics 08
1.9 Methodology and emission factors 10
1.10 Reporting criteria 16
1.11 Independent accountant’s review report 20
Section 2: Additional environmental metrics
Table 13 Other emissions (metric tons) 21
Table 14 Electricity consumption by region (MWh) 21
Table 15 Renewable electricity consumption by region (MWh) 21
Table 16 Non-renewable energy by region (MWh) 21
Table 17 Water withdrawal, consumption, and discharge detail (megaliters) 22
Table 18 Verication/assurance 22
Environmental Data Fact Sheet 2024
03
Section 1:
Our environmental data
1.1
Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
Table 1A – GHG emissions by scope (mtCO
2
e)
FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23
Scope 1 118,100 123,704 139,413 144,960
Scope 2
Location-based 4,328,916 5,010,667 6,381,250 8,077,403
Market-based 456,119 429,405 288,029 393,134
Subtotal emissions (Scope 1 + 2 market-based) 574,219 553,109 427,442 538,094
Scope 3
1
Category 1 – Purchased Goods & Services
2
4,415,000 4,930,000 5,780,000 5,564,000
Category 2 – Capital Goods 2,962,000 4,179,000 4,026,000 5,872,000
Category 3 – Fuel- and Energy-Related Activities 300,000 350,000 450,000 521,000
Category 4 – Upstream Transportation
3
243,000 225,000 371,000
318,000
Category 5 – Waste 9,500 5,700 8,000 8,000
Category 6 – Business Travel 329,356 21,901 139,000 133,000
Category 7 – Employee Commuting 317,000 80,000 141,000 187,000
Category 9 – Downstream Transportation 65,000 69,000 69,000 69,000
Category 11 – Use of Sold Products 2,983,000 3,950,000 5,101,000 3,941,000
Category 12 – End-of-Life of Sold Products 17,000 19,000 18,000 4,000
Category 13 – Downstream Leased Assets 11,800 9,600 8,000 7,000
Subtotal emissions
4
11,653,000 13,839,000 16,111,000
16,624,000
Total emissions (Scope 1 + 2 + 3)
4
12,227,000 14,392,000 16,538,000
17,162,000
1. For FY20 and FY21, values have been rounded except for Business Travel. Starting in FY22, all reported Scope 3 values
are rounded to the nearest thousand mtCO
2
e.
2. Reported emissions for this category now incorporate emissions calculated using the life cycle assessment (LCA)
coecients for the portion associated with the manufacture of Microsoft devices as outlined in Section 1.9. Values for
FY22 (previous year), and FY20 (base year) have been adjusted to reect the following changes: incorporation of LCA
methodology and estimation for the Nuance acquisition.
3. Reported emissions for this category now incorporate emissions calculated following the Global Logistics Emissions
Council (GLEC) Framework for our Devices and Cloud business groups as outlined in Section 1.9. Values for FY22
(previous year), and FY20 (base year) have been adjusted to reect this change.
4. These values reect market-based emissions. Values rounded to nearest thousand mtCO
2
e.
Environmental Data Fact Sheet 2024
04
Table 1B – GHG emissions by scope (mtCO
2
e) with management’s criteria
FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23
Scope 1 + 2
1
574,219 553,109 427,442 538,094
Scope 3
Management’s criteria
2
Category 4 – Upstream Transportation with SAFc 243,000 225,000 371,000 305,000
Category 6 – Business Travel with SAFc 385,000 23,000 157,000 124,000
Category 11 – Use of Sold Products
3
2,600,000 2,622,000 1,332,000 2,158,000
GHGP-aligned
Rest of the categories
1,4
8,097,000 9,642,000 10,500,000 12,232,000
Subtotal emissions 11,325,000 12,512,000 12,360,000 14,819,000
Total emissions (Scope 1 + 2 + 3)
1
11,899,000 13,065,000 12,787,000
15,357,000
1. These values reect market-based emissions.
2. Emissions for these categories are reported per the reporting criteria dened in Section 1.10 of this fact sheet and per
the methodologies outlined in Section 1.9. All values have been rounded to the nearest thousand mtCO
2
e.
3. Per the reporting criteria dened in Section 1.10 of this fact sheet, reported values are gross emissions net of
renewable electricity. Gross emissions without the impact of renewable electricity are as follows: 2,158,000 mtCO
2
e
(FY23), 2,207,000 mtCO
2
e (FY22), 2,622,000 mtCO
2
e (FY21), 2,600,000 mtCO
2
e (FY20).
4. Reported value represents a sum of Category 1 – Purchased Goods & Services, Category 2 – Capital Goods,
Category 3 – Fuel- and Energy-Related Activities, Category 5 – Waste, Category 7 – Employee Commuting,
Category 9 – Downstream Transportation, Category 12 – End-of-Life of Sold Products, and Category 13 – Downstream
Leased Assets. All values have been rounded to the nearest thousand mtCO
2
e.
Table 2 – GHG emissions by type
(mt) FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23
Scope 1
Scope 1 – CO
2
96,700
94,292
99,123
92,466
Scope 1 – CH
4
2
3
2
3
Scope 1 – N
2
O
1
1
1
1
Scope 1 – HFCs
19
27
37
49
Scope 1 – SF
6
0
0
0
0
Scope 2 (location-based)
Scope 2 – CO
2
4,305,119
4,984,442
6,349,431
8,034,943
Scope 2 – CH
4
283
330
382
515
Scope 2 – N
2
O
56
60
75
99
Scope 2 (market-based)
Scope 2 – CO
2
454,034
427,606
286,992
390,884
Scope 2 – CH
4
19
18
10
23
Scope 2 – N
2
O
5
5
3
6
(mtCO
2
e)
Scope 1 118,100 123,704
139,413
144,960
Scope 1 – CO
2
96,700
94,292
99,123
92,466
Scope 1 – CH
4
53
63
62
63
Scope 1 – N
2
O 236 150
209 292
Scope 1 – HFCs 21,070
29,177
39,993
52,087
Scope 1 – SF
6
41 22 26
52
Scope 2 (location-based) 4,328,916
5,010,667
6,381,250
8,077,403
Scope 2 – CO
2
4,305,119
4,984,442
6,349,431
8,034,943
Scope 2 – CH
4
7,063
8,248
9,543
12,868
Scope 2 – N
2
O 16,734
17,977
22,276
29,592
Scope 2 (market-based) 456,119
429,405 288,029
393,134
Scope 2 – CO
2
454,034
427,606
286,992
390,884
Scope 2 – CH
4
483
456
243
571
Scope 2 – N
2
O 1,602
1,343
794
1,679
Environmental Data Fact Sheet 2024
05
Table 3 – GHG emissions by region (mtCO
2
e)
FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23
Scope 1
Asia 8,650 9,664 13,532 18,529
Europe, Middle East, Africa 61,719 69,251 68,181 51,866
Latin America 3,871 4,403 4,522 4,604
North America 43,860 40,386 53,178 69,961
Subtotal 118,100 123,704 139,413 144,960
Scope 2 (location-based)
Asia 905,585 1,082,697 1,660,153 2,044,242
Europe, Middle East, Africa 902,859 916,141 1,252,717 1,547,728
Latin America 16,022 16,479 51,328 45,038
North America 2,504,450 2,995,350 3,417,052 4,440,395
Subtotal 4,328,916 5,010,667 6,381,250 8,077,403
Scope 2 (market-based)
Asia 320,449 297,646 274,585 369,346
Europe, Middle East, Africa 49,377 54,805 13,167 22,775
Latin America 594 708 247 202
North America 85,699 76,246 30 811
Subtotal 456,119 429,405 288,029 393,134
Table 4 – GHG emissions intensity (mtCO
2
e/revenue $M)
FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23
Revenue ($M) 143,015 168,088 198,270 211,915
Scope 1 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7
Scope 2 (location-based) 30.3 29.8 32.2 38.1
Scope 2 (market-based) 3.2 2.6 1.5 1.9
Scope 3 (market-based)
1
81.5 82.3 81.3 78.4
Scope 1 + 2 (location-based) 31.1 30.5 32.9 38.8
Scope 1 + 2 (market-based) 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.6
Scope 1 + 2 + 3 (market-based)
1
85.5
85.6
83.5
81.0
1. Emission values (numerator) for FY22 (previous year) and FY20 (base year) have been adjusted to reect the following
changes: incorporation of LCA methodology, estimation for the Nuance acquisition, and emissions calculated
following the Global Logistics Emissions Council (GLEC) Framework for our devices and Cloud business groups.
Table 5 – Carbon osets (mtCO
2
e)
FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23
GHG emissions within carbon neutral boundary
1
612,927 292,106 514,156 605,354
Osets applied to reporting year 612,927 292,106 514,156 605,354
Net GHG emissions within carbon neutral boundary
1,2
– – – –
Total removal osets contracted
3
– 1,391,187 1,443,981 5,015,019
1. This data supports Microsoft’s target to be carbon neutral every year since scal year 2013. Microsoft denes carbon
neutrality as matching the emissions within the carbon neutrality boundary with an equivalent amount of carbon
osets as shown in this table. The boundary for this carbon neutral goal includes global Scope 1, Scope 2 market-
based, and Scope 3 business air travel emissions. Starting in FY23, values for Scope 3 business air travel emissions
follow management’s criteria as reported under Category 6 – Business Travel with SAFc. For more detail on carbon
credits we purchase and emissions methodology, please see Sections 1.8 and 1.9 of this Fact Sheet. As we made
progress towards our carbon negative targets, which included purchasing removal osets, we also maintained
carbon neutrality.
2. Values reect Microsoft’s carbon neutrality at the time of reporting. Per our carbon negative target, by 2050 we
expect to have removed from the environment all the carbon the company has emitted either directly or by electrical
consumption since it was founded in 1975.
3. Values reported represent osets contracted to be delivered in the current or future scal year. Contracted removal
values only include removal credits that have been evaluated as consistent with Microsoft’s quality removal criteria.
This number might change based on actual versus projected outcomes related to contract fulllment (delivery of
osets). Only removal osets that are delivered get applied/retired against our carbon neutral boundary.
Environmental Data Fact Sheet 2024
06
1.2 Energy
Table 6 – Energy consumption within the organization (MWh)
FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23
Total energy consumption
1
11,283,502 14,133,987 18,644,872 24,007,868
Non-renewable fuel consumed 449,304 446,417 473,137 413,955
Natural gas 218,557 249,443 273,964 150,972
Crude oil/diesel 147,297 143,370 117,195 160,754
LPG/propane/jet fuel 40,450 4,245 34,152 54,239
Gasoline 43,000 49,359 47,826 47,990
Electricity, heating, cooling, and steam 10,834,198 13,687,570 18,171,735 23,593,913
Electricity 10,770,714 13,621,517 18,153,454 23,567,502
Cooling (chilled water) 51,026 54,953 7,393 12,090
Hot water/steam 12,458 11,100 10,888 14,321
Total renewable electricity consumption
2
10,244,377 12,969,393 18,153,454
23,567,502
Renewable energy credits and PPAs 10,244,059 12,969,246 18,153,218 23,564,161
Onsite renewable energy 318 147 236 3,341
1. Only reported categories and values are applicable to Microsoft’s energy consumption. Renewable fuels, electricity
sold, heating sold, cooling sold, and steam sold categories are currently not applicable. Reported values for FY23
expressed in gigajoules (GJ): total energy consumption equals 86,428,325 GJ, and total non-renewable fuel consumed
equals 1,490,239 GJ.
2. Reported values represent Microsoft’s total renewable energy consumption expressed in MWh from onsite,
renewable energy credits, power purchase agreements (PPAs), and green power tari programs. Values reect
Microsoft’s renewable electricity consumption at the time of reporting.
Table 7 – Renewable energy metrics
FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23
Percentage of renewable electricity
1
100% 100% 100%
100%
Percentage of direct renewable electricity – – 62% 59%
1. Values reect Microsoft’s percentage of renewable electricity consumption at the time of reporting.
Table 8 – Energy intensity (MWh/revenue $M)
FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23
Electricity consumed within the organization (MWh) 10,770,714 13,621,517 18,153,454 23,567,502
Revenue ($M) 143,015 168,088 198,270 211,915
Electricity consumption normalized by revenue
(MWh/$M)
75 81 92 111
1.3 Water
Table 9 – Water and euents (megaliters)
1
FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23
Total water withdrawals
2
7,936 8,068 10,706 12,951
Third-party water 7,831 8,011 10,665 12,926
Surface water 89 41 39 21
Ground water 16 16 2 4
Total water discharges
2,3
3,740 3,295 4,307 5,107
Third-party water 3,740 3,295 4,307 5,107
Total water consumption
2
4,196 4,773 6,399 7,844
1. For FY23, total water withdrawal from areas with water stress was 5,326 megaliters (ML) (41%) and was primarily
sourced from third-party water; total water discharge to areas with water stress was 2,045 ML (40%); and total water
consumption from areas with water stress was 3,281 ML (42%). Water risk assessment was conducted using WRI’s
Aqueduct tool for areas in high or extremely high baseline water stress.
2. Brackish surface water/seawater and produced water categories are not relevant to Microsoft since there is no direct
withdrawal or discharge of water from and to these sources. For withdrawals, data breakdown between “freshwater”
and “other water” categories, and data for third-party withdrawal sources for areas with water stress is currently
unavailable and will be part of data improvements going forward. For the periods presented we are not gathering
data around water storage since it is not a signicant portion of our water inventory.
3. Only discharges to third parties are relevant since water that is not consumed at Microsoft sites is discharged to local
municipal treatment plants. Discharges to surface water, groundwater, and seawater, and volume sent for use to other
organizations are not applicable. For discharges, data breakdown between “freshwater” and “other water” categories
is currently unavailable and will be part of data improvements going forward. Primary treatment of water is not
relevant because there are no onsite water treatment plants in Microsoft operations, as there is no requirement to
conduct onsite primary treatment of discharge by any environmental regulation or standard.
Environmental Data Fact Sheet 2024
07
1.4 Waste and circularity
Table 10 – Operational waste generated, diverted, and directed to disposal (metric tons)
1,4
FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23
Non-hazardous 31,102 20,768 28,715
36,197
Diverted Reused 1,136 2,171 2,931 3,788
Recycled 8,452 9,589 10,233 14,512
Composted 10,104 1,776 3,106 6,170
Subtotal 19,692 13,536 16,270 24,470
Directed to disposal Landlled 10,848 6,957 12,204 11,510
Incinerated
2
562 275 241 217
Subtotal 11,410 7,232 12,445 11,727
Hazardous 9,469 1,750 881 195
Diverted Recycled 7,581 1,742 879 193
Reused 1,880 0 0 0
Subtotal 9,461 1,742 879 193
Directed to disposal Other
3
8 8 2 2
Diverted subtotal 29,153 15,278 17,149 24,663
Directed to disposal subtotal 11,418 7,240 12,447 11,729
Total waste generated 40,571 22,518 29,596 36,392
1. Data for reuse or other diversion methods besides recycling for hazardous waste, and other disposal operations
besides landlled and incineration for non-hazardous waste is currently not applicable. Reported waste data is mainly
directed for disposal osite.
2. Incinerated category under non-hazardous includes incineration with and without energy recovery.
3. The “other” category under hazardous includes landlled and incinerated with and without energy recovery waste.
4. Starting in FY23, reported values incorporate an updated extrapolation approach, only for non-campus workplace
locations not providing data, that more accurately reects waste diversion practices as outlined in Section 1.9.
Table 11 – Product packaging circularity metrics
FY22 FY23
Percentage of product packaging recyclability 94.4% 93.9%
Percentage of single-use plastics in product packaging 3.3% 2.7%
1.5
Ecosystems
Table 12 – Land protection
Status Country FY21 FY22 FY23
Total acres categorized
by the status at the close
of the reporting period
as either (i) funded or (ii)
protected
Funded
1
US 4,998 4,998 5,169
Belize 12,270 12,270 12,270
Subtotal 17,268 17,268 17,439
Protected US – – 3,579
Belize – 12,270 12,270
Subtotal – 12,270 15,849
A description of
partnerships for which
contributions were
made that exist with
third parties to protect
habitat areas
Since mak
ing this commitment in April 2020, Microsoft identied two leading
land protection organizations, the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation
(NFWF) within the United States and The Nature Conservancy (TNC) globally,
to partner with on our land protection journey. A data-informed approach
to identify ecosystems most at risk was used, using TNC’s last chance
ecosystem framework and NFWF’s national landscape conservation framework.
Within each of the two partnerships the following organizations will hold the
conservation easement/own the protected land:
• The Nature Conservancy: Belize Maya Forest Trust
• National Fish and Wildlife Foundation: Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife,
a
nd Parks; New Mexico Land Conservancy, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation
for the US
1. Reported funded acres in FY23 have been updated to reect Microsoft’s nal project funding distribution.
Environmental Data Fact Sheet 2024
08
1.6
Management’s assertion
Management of Microsoft Corporation is responsible for the completeness, accuracy, and validity of the disclosures
included in this Section 1 of the Environmental Data Fact Sheet. Management is also responsible for the collection,
quantication, and presentation of the specied information included in Section 1 of the Environmental Data Fact
Sheet and for the selection or development of the criteria, which management believes provides an objective basis
for measuring and reporting on the specied information. Management of Microsoft Corporation asserts that the
specied information included in Section 1 of the Environmental Data Fact Sheet as of, and for the scal year ended
June 30, 2023 (FY23) is presented in accordance with the criteria set forth in Section 1.10, Reporting criteria.
1.7
Description of the company and inventory boundary
Microsoft’s environmental sustainability data, which includes GHG emissions, energy, waste, product packaging
recyclability and single-use plastics, water, and ecosystem metrics, has been prepared following Microsoft’s
scal year basis as the reporting period covering the timeframe of July 1 to June 30. The Corporate, External and
Legal Aairs (CELA) Sustainability team within Microsoft under the leadership of the Chief Sustainability Ocer
(CSO) holds the responsibility to monitor and report sustainability environmental data. For setting organizational
boundaries and for corporate reporting of GHG emissions, energy, waste, product packaging recyclability and
single-use plastics, and water metrics in the preceding Tables 1-12, Microsoft uses the operational control approach.
This includes global wholly owned and partially owned subsidiaries over which Microsoft has management and
operational control, including Microsoft owned and leased real estate facilities and datacenters.
1.8
Information on metrics
Microsoft announced in January 2020 that we will be carbon negative by 2030 and that by 2050 we will remove
from the atmosphere an equivalent amount of all the carbon the company has emitted either directly or by our
electricity consumption since being founded in 1975. Microsoft plans to achieve this goal by reducing Scope 3
emissions (market-based and management’s criteria) by more than half; and by reducing Scope 1 and 2 (market-
based) emissions to near zero by the middle of the decade through energy eciency work and reaching 100%
renewable energy by 2025. The baseline year is 2020, which was the year when the announcement was made.
Microsoft has a metrics recalculation policy for historical data (including previous and base year) to ensure
consistency whenever year-over-year structural changes, methodology changes, or other accuracy improvements
are signicant. Structural changes include mergers, acquisitions, and divestitures. Microsoft will begin to
include data associated from any merger and/or acquisition the year following the close of such transaction.
Divestments will be reected in data the year when the transaction occurred. Methodology changes include
changes in a calculation methodology or new activity types for greater data granularity. Accuracy improvements
include the correction of signicant errors or cumulative minor errors that together are signicant and/or updates
to available supplier reported data. Footnotes under each table will highlight when specic adjustments are made.
Microsoft’s GHG inventory includes ve of the seven GHGs addressed by the Kyoto Protocol—carbon dioxide (CO
2
),
methane (CH
4
), nitrous oxide (N
2
O), hydrouorocarbons (HFCs), and sulfur hexauoride (SF
6
). Microsoft does not
currently use or emit peruorocarbons (PFCs) and nitrogen triuoride (NF
3
).
This carbon inventory is what is in scope of our carbon negative commitment.
The following is a more detailed list of activities included in the GHG inventory:
• Scope 1 direct GHG emissions from onsite fossil fuel combustion (including natural gas, propane, fuel
oil, and diesel), executive air travel, ground transportation (Microsoft owned and directly leased),
hydrouorocarbon (HFC) refrigerants, and SF
6
used at some facilities.
• Scope 2 indirect GHG emissions from purchased electricity, chilled water, and steam. The location-based
method is based on average emission factors for the electricity grids that provide electricity to our
datacenters, buildings, and campuses. The market-based method includes consideration of contractual
arrangements under which Microsoft procures power from specic suppliers or sources, such as renewable
energy. In the market-based method, we also capture the impact from onsite renewable energy generation,
power purchase agreements (PPAs), the purchase of unbundled energy attribute certicates (EACs), and
green power products.
• Scope 3 indirect GHG emissions for the following categories identied as relevant for Microsoft:
◦ Category 1 – Purchased Goods & Services
◦ Category 2 – Capital Goods
◦ Category 3 – Fuel- and Energy-Related Activities (location-based and market-based)
◦ Category 4 – Upstream Transportation (reported both under the GHG Protocol and per management’s
criteria, see Section 1.10)
◦ Category 5 – Waste
◦ Category 6 – Business Travel (reported both under the GHG Protocol and per management’s criteria, see
Section 1.10)
◦ Category 7 – Employee Commuting
◦ Category 9 – Downstream Transportation
◦ Category 11 – Use of Sold Products (reported both under the GHG Protocol and per management’s
criteria, see Section 1.10)
◦ Category 12 – End-of-Life of Sold Products
◦ Category 13 – Downstream Leased Assets
Environmental Data Fact Sheet 2024
09
For carbon removal, the following Microsoft criteria is used to select carbon removal osets that we contract:
Microsoft Criteria for High-Quality Carbon Dioxide Removal. Both third-party certied and uncertied tons are
purchased in an eort to help develop the market, and only certied tons are applied to the carbon neutrality scope
(Scope 1, Scope 2 market-based, and business air travel). For the certied portion, the following validation and
verication bodies have provided the certication: Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS), American Carbon Registry
(ACR), Climate Action Reserve (CAR), and California Air Resources Board (CARB). The reported carbon removal
contracted value total also includes future tons that are to be delivered in subsequent years.
Microsoft procures and uses renewable energy from onsite generation, unbundled EACs, power purchase
agreements (PPAs), and green power products. The purchases of EACs include renewable energy certicates
(RECs) (Green-e certied), guarantees of origin (GO), renewable energy guarantees of origin (REGO), I-RECs,
tradable instrument for global renewables (TIGR), J-Credits, Non-Fossil Fuel Certicates (NFCs), large-scale energy
certicates (LGC), Green Electricity Certicates (GECs), and PowerPlus. In some cases for unbundled EAC purchases,
Microsoft receives the certicates after our inventory has been compiled and assured, due to the timing certicate
registry processes follow. Microsoft procures enough renewable electricity to match 100% of our global electricity
consumption. To calculate Scope 2 emissions from a market-based approach, Microsoft captures the impact across
all renewable electricity purchases and matches that with the market where we operate, aligned with the GHG
Protocol. In the case that renewable electricity is not procured in the markets where we operate and to ensure
we maintain the 100% renewable electricity commitment, enough renewable electricity from nearby markets is
purchased. Finally, Microsoft captures the impact from onsite generation, PPAs, and green power products to
support our progress against our commitment to have 100% direct renewable electricity by 2025.
Microsoft’s water inventory includes the withdrawal, consumption, and discharge associated with assets under
our operational control. These volumes represent global enterprise-wide operations including owned and
leased oces, datacenters, labs, and retail. This data supports progress tracking against current water positive
program commitments.
For waste and circularity, operational waste and product packaging recyclability and single-use plastics are
included. The operational waste inventory includes the mass of waste generated from operations within Microsoft’s
operational control that are landlled, incinerated, recycled, reused, and composted for both non-hazardous and
hazardous categories, for both owned and leased facilities. This waste inventory supports progress tracking against
the commitment of diverting 90% of operational waste at datacenters and campuses. Currently the waste inventory
does not include waste from construction and deconstruction activities.
For product packaging, both packaging recyclability and single-use plastics metrics consider all hardware packaging
(retail and commercial) and consumer software packaging of the products produced and sold during the reporting
year. Similarly, these metrics support our product packaging-related commitments to make fully recyclable product
packaging by 2030, and to eliminate single-use plastic in packaging by 2025. The calculations exclude impact from
inks, glues, coatings, and label liner material that is removed before a label is applied.
Reported data for ecosystems includes the total area of land that has been funded and protected based on the
presented denition in Table 1.10 for reporting criteria. Microsoft’s land protection commitment was established in
FY20. Reported data represents progress through the end of FY23.
According to Microsoft’s structural changes policy previously described in the introduction section, FY23 data
across metrics now incorporates impact from the Nuance acquisition which was previously completed in March
2022. Additional details are included as needed in the table footnotes to highlight any prior year adjustments.
Structural changes items are part of Microsoft’s continuous data improvement activities and will be included and
highlighted accordingly in the relevant reporting cycle.
Environmental Data Fact Sheet 2024
10
1.9 Methodology and emission factors
Carbon - Scope 1 and 2
Primary data is used to calculate emissions for both Scope 1 and 2 emissions. Estimates are used where primary
data is not available. Depending on the type of site, the estimation methodology uses capacity (MW) or oorspace
based coecients to extrapolate emissions for those locations where primary data is unavailable. Activity data
is collected internally and stored in an internally developed data platform which then applies the corresponding
emission factors to calculate emissions. Microsoft uses the 100-year IPCC Fourth Assessment when it comes to
applying global warming potential values.
Scope and source Emission factors source
Scope 1 (all fuels) EPA Emission Factors Hub. March 2018.
Scope 2
Electricity (US)
Year 2021 eGRID Subregion Emission Factors: eGRID 2021, January 2023.
Scope 2
Electricity (international
unless otherwise sourced)
IEA (2022), Emission Factors
Scope 2
Electricity (Australia)
Year 2022 factors from “Table 1: Indirect (Scope 2 and Scope 3) emission
factors from consumption of purchased or acquired electricity: Location based
approach”, Australian National Greenhouse Accounts Factors, August 2023.
Scope 2
Electricity (Brazil)
Year 2022 factors from the Brazilian Ministry of Science, Technology,
Innovation and Communication: Fator médio - Inventários corporativos.
Scope 2
Electricity (Canada)
National inventory report 1990-2021. Annex 13. Year 2021 factors. From April
2023 release.
Scope 2
Electricity (UK)
2023 Government Greenhouse Gas Conversion Factors for Company
Reporting: Methodology Paper for Conversion Factors. Year 2021 factors from
June 2023 release.
Emission factors presented in the preceding table apply to current reporting year and are used for location-based
accounting. For market-based accounting, Microsoft uses a zero-emission factor for procured renewable electricity.
In the locations where Microsoft did not procure renewable electricity, utility-based and residual emission factors
were unavailable; therefore we used the average grid factors presented previously.
Carbon - Scope 3
Microsoft calculates and reports Scope 3 emissions for all relevant categories. The following table summarizes
which categories are relevant and a description of the methodologies and emission factors used.
Scope
3 category Emissions calculation methodology
Percentage
of em
issions
calculated
using supplier
data
Purchased
Good
s and
Services
This category includes emissions from upstream purchasing of goods and
services, including direct and indirect goods. Microsoft has been using
an ISO 14040/ISO 14044 compliant life cycle assessment (LCA) approach
for many years to track the emissions associated with its devices. In FY23,
Microsoft started using its LCAs to calculate the portion of emissions
associated with the manufacture of devices Microsoft sold during the
reporting year including Xbox devices, Surface devices, HoloLens,
keyboards, mice, and other peripherals. Microsoft utilized Makersite and
internal software engineering teams in order to automate and scale the
modeling of complex electronic products. To ensure a more supply chain
specic accounting process, the system analyzes the bill of materials
and material composition from full material declarations collected from
suppliers, resulting in LCA-based emissions that have increased accuracy,
transparency, and representativeness. GWPs are from the IPCC Fourth
Assessment Report (AR4), 100-year average. For the rest of the emissions,
Microsoft requests carbon emissions data from its suppliers and uses
their responses to determine Scope 1, Scope 2, and upstream Scope 3
emission factors (mtCO
2
e/$ revenue). The latest available responses are
used, so this report’s inventory considers 2023 submissions (that is, 2022
data). Microsoft estimates emissions for suppliers who submitted data by
multiplying their response-derived factor by the annual spend with the
supplier. All other spend is mapped to corresponding industry sectors
and then multiplied by cradle-to-gate emission factors by sector from UK
Defra’s “UK Defra, Table 13 — Indirect emissions from the supply chain.
March 2014”—updated per the latest ination and currency conversion
rates. Corporate-wide expense data for all company divisions is obtained
from the nance department. Activities already included in Scope 1 and
Scope 2 (such as electricity purchases) and other Scope 3 categories
(such as capital goods) were removed to prevent double counting.
Global warming potentials (GWP) values are derived from the underlying
supplier responses and Defra data sources.
51%
Environmental Data Fact Sheet 2024
11
Scope
3 category Emissions calculation methodology
Percentage
of emissions
calculated
using supplier
data
Capital Goods This category includes emissions from upstream purchasing of capital
goods, including server equipment and other long-term assets.
Microsoft requests carbon emissions data from its suppliers and uses
their responses to determine Scope 1, Scope 2, and upstream Scope 3
emission factors (tCO
2
e/$ revenue). The latest available responses are
used, so this report’s inventory considers 2023 submissions (that is, 2022
data). Microsoft estimates emissions for suppliers who submitted data by
multiplying their response-derived factor by the annual spend with the
supplier. All other spend is mapped to corresponding industry sectors
and then multiplied by cradle-to-gate emission factors by sector from
UK Defra’s "UK Defra, Table 13 – Indirect emissions from the supply chain.
March 2014"—updated per the latest ination and currency conversion
rates. Corporate-wide expense data for all company divisions is obtained
from the nance department. Activities already included in Scope 1 and
Scope 2 (such as electricity purchases) and other Scope 3 categories
(such as purchased goods and services) were removed to prevent double
counting. GWP values are derived from the underlying supplier responses
and Defra data sources.
70%
Fuel- and
Energy-
Related
Activities (not
included in
Scope 1 or 2)
Starting in FY23, Microsoft reports this category using a market-based
approach only, which has been the approach used to track progress
against our carbon negative commitment. Fuel- and energy-related
activities (not included in Scope 1 or 2) include three emission sources.
First, upstream emissions of purchased electricity were calculated by
multiplying electricity use by emission factors from life cycle analysis tools
for the United States and UK Defra 2015 Guidelines for non-US countries.
When calculating the market-based approach and including the impact
from purchased renewable electricity, the upstream emissions associated
with fuel are zero. Second, fuel consumption was multiplied by emission
factors from the GREET and Ecoinvent life cycle analysis tools. And third,
transmission and distribution (T&D) losses (by energy use type) were
multiplied by loss percentages from the EPA’s eGRID2020 database for the
United States and emission factors from IEA (2022) emission factors for
other countries. GWPs are from the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4),
100-year average.
96%
Percentage
of emissions
calculated
Scope
using supplier
3 category Emissions calculation methodology
data
Upstream
Transportation
and
Distribution
This category includes emissions from upstream transportation of goods,
including all transportation of goods that Microsoft nances. In FY23,
Microsoft started calculating emissions for this category following the
Global Logistics Emissions Council (GLEC) Framework using data inputs
from Microsoft’s fourth-party logistics service provider, TMC. Our Devices
business group applies this calculation considering the shipment weight,
distance traveled, and the corresponding well-to-wheel (WTW) fuel
emission factor appropriate for each mode or vehicle type. In addition
to these inputs, our Cloud business group uses the EcoTransIT tool
which identies the mode of transportation on each leg by breaking
down the route through milestones, and incorporates more granular
location data, equipment data, and WTW emissions factors. For the
rest of the emissions, Microsoft requests carbon emissions data from
its suppliers and uses their responses to determine Scope 1, Scope 2,
and upstream Scope 3 emission factors (mtCO
2
e/$ revenue). The latest
available responses are used, so this report’s inventory considers 2023
submissions (that is, 2022 data). Microsoft estimates emissions for
suppliers who submitted data by multiplying their response-derived
factor by the annual spend with the supplier. All other spend is mapped
to corresponding industry sectors and then multiplied by cradle-to-
gate emission factors by sector from UK Defra’s “UK Defra, Table 13
— Indirect emissions from the supply chain. March 2014”—updated
per the latest ination and currency conversion rates. Corporate-wide
expense data for all company divisions is obtained from the nance
department. Spend data associated with our upstream transportation and
distribution activities is then isolated within the corporate spend report.
GWP values are derived from the underlying supplier responses and Defra
data sources.
97%
Waste
Generated in
Operations
The waste gure represents emissions from waste disposed via landlling,
incineration, recycling, and compost. Emissions from waste are calculated
using methodologies and emission factors from the EPA’s Waste
Reduction Model (WARM), version 15. This model uses waste mass as the
data input and bases its emissions calculations on a life cycle analysis,
including emissions from the long-term decomposition of waste in a
landll or from upstream sources/sinks. GWPs are from the IPCC Fourth
Assessment Report (AR4), 100-year average.
64%
Environmental Data Fact Sheet 2024
12
Scope
3 category Emissions calculation methodology
Percentage
of emissions
calculated
using supplier
data
3 category Emissions calculation methodology
data
Percentage
of emissions
calculated
Scope
using supplier
Business Travel This category includes emissions from commercial air travel, hotel night
stays, rail travel, reimbursed mileage, rental cars, and taxi/rideshares.
For commercial air and rail travel, Microsoft Corporate Travel provides
ight/ride-level airport codes and cabin class data. The airport/rail
station codes are used to calculate distances to determine whether the
ights/rides were short, medium, or long haul. Using the distance-based
method, ight distances and cabin class are used to calculate CO
2
e
emissions, using the appropriate tank-to-wake emission factors from 2022
Government GHG Conversion Factors for Company Reporting. For hotel
night stays, Microsoft’s preferred hotel vendors provided emissions
per hotel night stay coecients. For other hotel chains, emissions were
estimated based on nights stayed and the emission factors from the
EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Inventory Guidance: Indirect Emissions from Events
and Conferences (Dec 2018). For rental cars, mileage, fuel, and emission
data was provided from each rental car company. For taxi/rideshare and
reimbursed mileage, emissions were estimated based on spend using
emission factors from EPA Emission Factor Hub. March 2018. GWPs are
from the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), 100-year average.
91%
Sustainable
Aviation
F
u
e
l (
SAF)
(management’s
criteria)
This category includes the emissions associated with Category 4 –
U
pstream Transportation and Distribution with SAFc and Category 6 –
Business Travel with SAFc. For Scope 3 Category 4 emissions with SAFc,
the emissions reductions from the volume of SAF associated with SAFc
purchased for the reporting year is applied against air cargo emissions
calculated using the previously stated methodology for Category
4 – Upstream Transportation and Distribution to derive the reported
annual emissions gure. For Scope 3 Category 6 emissions with SAFc,
the emissions reductions from the volume of SAF associated with SAFc
purchased for the reporting year is applied against air travel emissions
calculated using the previously stated methodology for Category 6 –
Business Travel, inclusive of well-to-tank and tank-to-wake emissions,
using the appropriate factors from Defra’s 2022 Government GHG
Conversion Factors for Company Reporting to derive the reported annual
emissions gure. The total emissions reductions from the volume of SAF
associated with SAFc purchased for the reporting year are allocated
between Category 4 and Category 6 based on an internal determination
by management on where the SAFc should be applied. Management’s
methodology for reporting SAFc in these categories was informed by the
approach outlined in the World Economic Forum Sustainable Aviation
Fuel Certicate Emissions Accounting and Reporting Guidelines (WEF
Accounting and Reporting Guidelines). This guideline informed both the
approach for calculating and reporting the well-to-wake emissions as well
as how to attribute the benets associated with SAFc for corporate travel
and air freight shipments. The SAF certicates we purchase are required
to include details about the SAF characteristics, origin and chain-of-
custody, and third-party certication. SAF certicates, which are certied
prior to delivery to Microsoft, must be certied by an independent
third party that they align with the requirements of an internationally
recognized sustainability certication scheme such as the International
Sustainability & Carbon Certication scheme or the Roundtable on
Sustainable Biomaterials including batch number and fuel/material type.
These SAFc requirements were also informed by the WEF Accounting and
Reporting Guidelines.
100%
Environmental Data Fact Sheet 2024
13
Scope
3 category
Scope
Emissions calculation methodology
Percentage
of emissions
calculated
using supplier
data
3 category
Employee
Commuting
This category captures emissions from commuting by all employees
and contractors that work in Microsoft buildings. Microsoft conducted
a survey in 2023 to capture detailed commuting habits from employees
and vendors at our Puget Sound campus, representing about 38% of
global Microsoft headcount. The survey is typically conducted annually,
and the results were scaled considering employee attendance records
to estimate global commuting emissions for Microsoft. Carbon dioxide
emission rates for passenger vehicles (single occupancy vehicle (SOV) and
carpool) are based on fuel consumption and miles traveled. A weighted
average fuel economy using the 2012 EPA Fuel Economy Trends Report
1975–2012 was derived, which provides combined fuel economy
for cars and trucks by year, and a set of car and truck age fractions
provided by the Puget Sound Regional Council. This data was used to
develop a weighted average fuel economy for the Puget Sound area.
Emission factors are derived from the Inventory of US. Greenhouse Gas
Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2010, Annex 2 (Methodology for estimating
CO
2
emissions from fossil fuel combustion). Carbon dioxide rates per
passenger mile are based on Federal Transit Administration, 2010 (Public
Transportation’s Role in Responding to Climate Change, US DOT, Federal
Transit Administration, January 2010). GWPs are from the IPCC Fourth
Assessment Report (AR4), 100-year average.
As nearly all Microsoft employees worked from home during the
COVID-19 pandemic, FY20 was the rst year to include emission impacts
from telework, and we have continued to include them in the subsequent
years. Telework energy consumption is assumed to include workstation/
plug-load energy usage, additional lighting, and household cooling/
heating consumption. One laptop, two monitors, and three lightbulbs are
assumed for each employee; other assumptions include 8 work hours/
day and 250 days/year using the devices. Oce/workspace oor area and
cooling/heating intensity are assumed based on EIA’s 2015 Residential
Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) data. From these assumptions, a
carbon emission intensity per employee is calculated, and total emissions
are calculated by multiplying the intensity by number of employees
working from home.
17%
Emissions calculation methodology
Upstream
Leased Assets
Not relevant. Microsoft includes leased assets in our Scope 1 and Scope 2
emissions reporting boundary.
–
Downstream
Transportation
and
Distribution
Included in this category are the emissions from transporting and
w
arehousing of devices Microsoft sold (including Xbox devices, Surface
devices, HoloLens, keyboards, mice, and other peripherals) from retail
distribution centers to retailers and between retail outlets and customers.
Calculations are based on internal Microsoft sales data and use standard
assumptions of distance between retailers and their distribution centers
and warehouse oorspace from an MWPVL International analysis
of Walmart’s distribution center network. Assumptions about the
energy intensity of warehouses come from the US Energy Information
Administration (EIA)’s Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey
(2012). All transportation data is kept consistent with the Global Logistics
Emissions Council Framework for Logistics Emissions Accounting and
Reporting, Version 2.0. GWPs are from the IPCC Fourth Assessment
Report (AR4), 100-year average.
0%
Processing of
Sold Products
Not relevant. Microsoft did not have any physical intermediate products
in the years reported.
–
Use of Sold
Products
Included in this category is the lifetime electricity use of devices Microsoft
sold including Xbox devices, Surface devices, HoloLens, keyboards, mice,
and other peripherals. Lifetime electricity use per device is calculated
based on standard product-use assumptions as included in our ISO
14040– and ISO 14044–compliant life cycle analyses. Calculations include
energy use assumptions that are derived from various guidance
documents, studies, or telemetry data. Assumptions on total lifetime
expected use (years) are used. Sales geography for the products sold
is used to determine the electricity emission factor used to calculate
emissions. Emissions from third-party devices running Microsoft software
are currently outside of the scope of our carbon commitments and
therefore not included. GWPs are from the IPCC Fourth Assessment
Report (AR4), 100-year average.
0%
Percentage
of emissions
calculated
using supplier
data
Environmental Data Fact Sheet 2024
14
Scope
3 category Emissions calculation methodology
Percentage
of emissions
calculated
using supplier
data
Percentage
of emissions
calculated
Scope
using supplier
3 category Emissions calculation methodology
data
Use of Sold
Products
(management’s
criteria)
This category includes the emissions of all Surface and Xbox devices
active during the reporting year, using telemetry-based methodology
to account for their electricity usage. Telemetry-based measurements
are used in addition to telemetry informed extrapolations to produce
regional electricity and emissions associated to the use of devices in
scope. For Xbox devices, telemetry data is gathered for all units still in
use in relation to console mode, which is then multiplied by average
power coecients to calculate electricity use. For Surface devices, energy
telemetry data is gathered from a representative sample of devices
that are grouped based on the device model and location and then the
average energy per device sampled is extrapolated to the respective
full daily active device population group based on a rolling seven-day
average. Emissions values from HoloLens, keyboards, mice, and other
peripherals currently fall under our signicance threshold and are not
included. Emissions from third-party devices running Microsoft software
are currently outside of the scope of our carbon commitments and
therefore not included. Electricity usage is estimated by country and
country average emission factors from the same sources highlighted for
Scope 2 are used to estimate emissions. GWPs are from the IPCC Fourth
Assessment Report (AR4), 100-year average.
0%
End of Life
Treatment of
Sold Products
Included in this category is the end-of-life treatment of devices Microsoft
sold during the reporting year including Xbox devices, Surface devices,
HoloLens, keyboards, mice, and other peripherals. Microsoft has been
using an ISO 14040/ISO 14044 compliant life cycle assessment (LCA)
approach for many years to track the end-of-life emissions for its devices.
To generate an estimate for this category, the model assumes materials
from devices are recycled, landlled, or incinerated at the end of their
useful life using material specic European collection and disposition rates
for electronic devices. In FY23, Microsoft revised its LCA process to use
Makersite and internal software engineering teams in order to automate
and scale the modeling of complex electronic products. GWPs are from
the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), 100-year average.
0%
Downstream
Leased Assets
Emissions associated with sublets are calculated using the intensities
derived from data collected for the primary leased space (for example,
kilowatt-hours/square foot (kWh/sf)) and prorated for the square
footage of the sublet space. In this way, it is assumed that the emissions
intensities of the leased spaces are the same as the overall buildings in
which they reside. Estimated refrigerants are calculated using the same
methodology and intensity as used to calculate refrigerant intensities
for assets occupied by Microsoft. Electricity emission factors used are
those appropriate to each location, as utilized in our Scope 1 and Scope
2 location-based inventory. GWPs are from the IPCC Fourth Assessment
Report (AR4), 100-year average.
85%
Franchises Not relevant. Microsoft did not operate franchises in the years reported. –
Investments Not relevant for reported years. Joint ventures, actively managed
investments, and direct equity investments totaled less than 2% of
Microsoft’s market capitalization at the end of the reporting period.
Microsoft has not engaged in the long-term nancing of projects
and the proceeds for each debt issuance have been for general
corporate purposes.
–
Environmental Data Fact Sheet 2024
15
Energy
As part of our carbon negative goal, Microsoft set a target to procure enough direct renewable electricity to
cover 100% of our electricity usage by 2025, meaning that we will have power purchase agreements (PPAs) or
other long-term contracts for green power products for 100% of carbon-emitting electricity consumed by all
our datacenters, buildings, and campuses. To calculate this percentage of direct renewable electricity, Microsoft
developed a methodology which considers the total direct renewable electricity consumption divided by the total
electricity consumption. The total direct renewable electricity consumption is the sum of renewable electricity the
entity directly produced, renewable electricity purchased via renewable PPAs and/or green power products, and the
renewable portion of the electricity grid mix. Primary data is used to represent the contracted renewable electricity
based on reports produced and submitted by the contracted assets in our portfolio. The renewable portion of the
electricity grid mix is the amount of renewable electricity that is on the power grid in the region of the Microsoft
facility that can be claimed as going into the electricity that our operations consume. The renewable portion of
the electricity grid mix used in the calculation is based on publicly available data for regions in which we have
determined the region’s grid mix has defensible claims, which is dened as regions where either (1) EACs are retired
by a utility or government entity on behalf of all utility/grid ratepayers, or (2) no EAC or customer-specic claims
exist. For geographies where publicly available data is incomplete or nonexistent, we apply assumptions based on
historical data or trends, and/or assume zero renewable electricity by default in their grid mix. Microsoft uses an
internally developed renewable grid mix policy to support and govern the process for determining the renewable
energy grid mix that can be counted toward our commitment. To calculate our percentage of direct renewable
electricity, we take the total direct renewable electricity consumption, divide it by our total electricity consumption,
and multiply by 100.
Additionally, as part of our carbon neutral (as dened in Table 5) target, Microsoft plans to achieve 100% renewable
electricity each year through a combination of considering not only direct renewable energy but also the
purchase of unbundled EACs. For this metric, the renewable portion of the electricity grid mix is excluded from
the calculation. The unbundled EACs included are listed in Section 1.8 of this fact sheet. To calculate the percent of
renewable electricity, we add up the various forms of renewable electricity and then divide it by Microsoft’s total
electricity consumption, and multiply by 100. Standard conversion factors are used for all energy metrics.
Water
Primary data is used to calculate water withdrawal, discharge, and consumption where Microsoft operates.
Estimates are used where primary data is not available. Water withdrawals are based on data from utility bills
from our largest sites and, in some cases, estimations. A water withdrawal estimation methodology was internally
developed for sites where primary data is unavailable that considers square footage, electricity consumption,
and datacenter cooling technology type. Where discharges and consumption are not metered, amounts are
estimated annually as part of the global water inventory aggregation process. Most of our sites do not currently
have discharge meters. For oce buildings without discharge meters, water consumption is assumed to be 10%
of withdrawals unless they have landscaping that requires irrigation. For datacenters, the cooling technology
type is used to drive the estimation. It is estimated that discharge equals the dierence between withdrawals
and consumption.
Microsoft continues to work on improvements for water data collection, including data on the sources of our water
withdrawals. This will allow us to know if water is coming directly from freshwater sources (groundwater and surface
water), or from alternative water sources (reclaimed water procured from a water utility or harvested rainwater).
Knowing the source of water withdrawals helps us incentivize the use of alternative water sources through our
replenishment and reduction targets.
Waste and circularity
Primary data is used to calculate waste generation where Microsoft operates. Operational waste mass (including
e-waste) is based on data from invoices and/or vendor and third-party reports. In the absence of actual data, there
is an extrapolation methodology. Depending on the type of site, the methodology uses capacity (MW) based
coecients by region or attendance to extrapolate waste for those locations where primary data is unavailable.
The extrapolation excludes e-waste, and all extrapolated waste is assumed to be landlled in cases where the
disposal or diversion method is unknown. Starting in FY23, we have updated the extrapolation approach only for
non-campus workplace locations not providing data in our portfolio. Under this approach we apply an attendance-
based global operational waste mass coecient, as well as recycling and compost diversion rates from applicable
reported workplace data (derived from actuals). Since most of the non-campus workplace sites are leased spaces
within a larger building, obtaining actual waste data can be challenging. This updated approach represents an
improvement that more accurately reects waste diversion practices that are in place at non-campus workplace sites.
Product packaging recyclability and the single-use plastics metrics are used to track our progress against our zero
waste program commitments. The design of all Microsoft product packaging are to be 100% recyclable in OECD
(Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries by 2030; and contain 0% single-use plastic
by 2025. In both cases, primary data is used from the bill of materials associated to the product packaging units
in scope. For product packaging recyclability, at the product packaging unit level, an end of life (EOL) scoring is
assigned to each packaging component based on publicly available information regarding the existing recovery
infrastructure in the OECD markets. Currently our methodology is primarily based on publicly available information
from the United States which is one of our biggest markets. Scores indicate relative acceptance of materials to
recycling, and range from 1 to 5, where a score of 1 means up to 20% recyclable (not generally accepted) and a
score of 5 is 100% recyclable (widely accepted to be recycled). A recyclability percentage is computed for each
packaging unit by adding the product of each component’s weight and EOL scores and dividing by the maximum
score value of 5. The reported enterprise-wide level metric is the simple average of all product packaging
recyclability percentages in scope. For the single-use plastics metric, the percentage by weight of single-use plastics
is calculated for each packaging unit. The enterprise-wide level metric is the simple average of all single-use plastics
percentages for each product packaging in scope.
Environmental Data Fact Sheet 2024
16
1.10
Reporting criteria
The following summary table denes the criteria for each specied metric included in Section 1 of the Environmental
Data Fact Sheet. Management is responsible for the selection of the criteria or the development of the criteria
(“management’s criteria”), which management believes provide an objective basis for measuring and reporting on
the specied information referenced in this table.
Microsoft has reported the information cited in this GRI content index for the scal year ended June 30, 2023 (FY23)
with reference to the GRI Standards using GRI 1: Foundation 2021.
Area
Specied
Information Criteria Tables
Carbon The statement of
GHG emissions
Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and
Reporting Standard (Revised Edition) and The Greenhouse
Gas Protocol: Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting
and Reporting Standard published by the World
Resources Institute/World Business Council for Sustainable
Development (collectively the “GHG Protocol”).
1A, 1B,
2, 3,
4, 5
Scope 3 Category
11 — Use of
Sold Products
(management’s
criteria)
Management’s criteria:
Use of sold products’ emissions in the reporting year in
metric tons of CO
2
e reported as:
a. Gross emissions.
b. Gross emissions, net of renewable electricity.
Gross emissions is calculated by multiplying a) the direct
use-phase energy, which is derived from emissions
gathered by the Company using telemetry data and
calculations used to measure energy usage from Xbox
consoles and Surface devices sold by Microsoft at any
point in time since product launch and which are still in
use by end users during the scal year being reported on
and b) location-based emissions factors.
For purposes of this metric, renewable electricity is
dened as the purchase of contractual instruments that
meet the “quality criteria” according to table 7.1 in the GHG
Protocol Scope 2 Guidance.
Microsoft shall disclose:
a. A description of the types and sources of data,
including telemetry activity data, emission factors,
and GWP (global warming potentials) values, used
to calculate emissions, and a description of the data
quality of reported emissions data.
b. A description of the methodologies, allocation
methods, and assumptions used to calculate
Scope 3 emissions and any exclusions.
1B
Environmental Data Fact Sheet 2024
17
Area
Specied
Information
Specied
Criteria Tables
Carbon Sustainable
Aviation Fuel
(management’s
criteria)
Management’s criteria:
1. Scope 3 Category 4 – Upstream Transportation &
Distribution with SAFc in the reporting year in metric
tons of CO
2
e reported as:
Category 4 with emissions reduction from SAFc is
calculated as total Category 4 life cycle emissions
as disclosed under “The Greenhouse Gas Protocol:
Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and
Reporting Standard” less the emissions reduction
benet from purchased SAF certicates applied only to
air cargo emissions.
2. Scope 3 Category 6 – Business Travel with SAFc in the
reporting year in metric tons of CO
2
e reported as:
Category 6 with emissions reduction from SAFc is
calculated as the sum of the total Category 6 emissions
as disclosed under “The Greenhouse Gas Protocol:
Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and
Reporting Standard” and the well-to-tank emissions
associated only to air travel, less the emission reduction
benet impact from purchased SAF certicates applied
only to air travel emissions.
SAF certicates are required to include details about the
SAF characteristics, origin and chain-of-custody, and third-
party certication. SAF certicates, which are certied by
an independent third party prior to delivery to Microsoft,
must align with the requirements of an internationally
recognized sustainability certication scheme such as the
International Sustainability & Carbon Certication scheme
or the Roundtable on Sustainable Biomaterials including
batch number and fuel/material type.
Microsoft shall disclose:
A description of the methodologies, allocation methods,
and assumptions used to calculate Scope 3 Category 4
with SAFc emissions and Scope 3 Category 6 with SAFc
emissions and any exclusions.
1B
Area Information Criteria Tables
Energy Energy
consumption
within the
organization
“Disclosure 302-1: Energy consumption within the
organization” from GRI 302: Energy 2016
6,7
Energy intensity “Disclosure 302-3: Energy intensity” from GRI 302:
E
nergy 2016
8
1. Renewable
ele
ctricity
2. Direct renewable
electricity
Management’s criteria:
The Company shall disclose:
1. Percentage of renewable electricity
a. Total renewable electricity consumption.
Total renewable electricity consumption is
the sum of renewable electricity the entity directly
produced, renewable electricity purchased via
renewable power purchase agreement (PPAs) or
green power products, and renewable electricity
purchased for which energy attribute certicates
(EACs) are paired with grid electricity; but excludes
the renewable portion of the electricity grid mix.
b. Percentage of renewable electricity. The percentage
of ren
ewable electricity shall be calculated as total
renewable electricity consumption divided by total
electricity consumption.
2. Percentage of direct renewable electricity
The percentage of direct renewable electricity
shall be calculated as total direct renewable
electricity consumption, dened as the sum of
renewable electricity the entity directly produced,
renewable electricity purchased via renewable
PPAs or green power products, and the renewable
portion of the electricity grid mix, divided by total
electricity consumption.
◦ Total electricity consumption is the same as
disclosed in “Disclosure 302-1(c)(i) Electricity
consumption” from the GRI Standard: 302
Energy 2016.
6,7
Environmental Data Fact Sheet 2024
18
Area
Specied
Information Criteria Tables
Specied
Area Information Criteria Tables
Energy 2. Direct renewable
electricity
(continued)
◦ Renewable electricity is dened as electricity that
comes from sources that are replenished at a rate
greater than or equal to their rate of depletion, such
as geothermal, wind, solar, hydro, and biomass.
◦ Renewable PPAs are renewable electricity Microsoft
purchased, if purchased through a renewable PPA
that explicitly includes EACs (RECs and GOs).
◦ Green power products are Green-e Energy Certied
utility or supplier programs, or other green power
products that explicitly include EACs.
◦ For any renewable electricity directly produced and
generated onsite, any EACs must be retained (that
is, not sold) and retired or cancelled on behalf of
Microsoft in order for Microsoft to claim them as
renewable energy.
◦ For renewable PPAs and green power products,
the agreement must explicitly include and convey
that EACs be retained or replaced and retired
or cancelled on behalf of Microsoft in order for
Microsoft to claim them as renewable electricity.
◦ The renewable portion of the electricity grid mix is
the portion that is outside of the control or inuence
of Microsoft.
◦ The renewable portion of the electricity grid mix
used in the calculation is based on publicly available
data in regions in which we have determined the
region’s grid mix has defensible claims which is
dened as regions where either (1) EACs are retired
by a utility or government entity on behalf of all
utility/grid ratepayers, or (2) no EAC or customer-
specic claims exist. Microsoft shall report a
description of the methodologies and assumptions
used to calculate grid mix of renewable electricity.
6.7
Water Water withdrawal “Disclosure 303-3: Water withdrawal” from GRI 303: Water
and Euents 2018
9
Water discharge “Disclosure 303-4: Water discharge” from GRI 303:
Water and Euents 2018
9
Water consumption “Disclosure 303-5: Water consumption” from GRI 303:
Water and Euents 2018
9
Waste &
Circularity
Waste generated “Disclosure 306-3: Waste generated” from the GRI 306:
Waste 2020
10
Waste diverted
from disposal
“Disclosure 306-4: Waste diverted from disposal” from the
GRI 306: Waste 2020
10
Waste directed to
disposal
“Disclosure 306-5: Waste directed to disposal” from the
GRI 306: Waste 2020
10
Percentage of
product packaging
recyclability
Management’s criteria:
The Company shall disclose a percentage of product
packaging recyclability for the packaging of products
available to be sold during the scal year.
The percentage of product packaging recyclability is an
enterprise-wide average, where each product packaging
unit’s percent recyclability is weighted equally.
Each product type sold by the Company has a product
packaging unit percent recyclability.
Each product packaging unit’s percent recyclability is
calculated by dividing a) the sum of the product of each
individual component’s weight and EOL scores, by b) the
maximum EOL score of 5.
EOL scores are assigned to each component of a
packaging unit based on publicly available information
regarding the relative acceptance of materials to
recycling based on existing recovery infrastructure
data. Scores range from 1 to 5, where 1 means
up to 20% recyclability acceptance and 5 is 100%
recyclability acceptance.
Microsoft shall report a description of data sources and
assumptions used to calculate the metric.
11
Environmental Data Fact Sheet 2024
19
Area
Specied
Information Criteria Tables
Waste &
Circularity
Percentage of
single-use plastics
(SUP) in product
packaging
Management’s criteria:
The Company shall disclose a percentage of SUP in
product packaging by weight used in the packaging of
products available to be sold during the scal year.
Each product type sold by the Company has a packaging
unit SUP percentage. Each packaging unit’s SUP
percentage is calculated by dividing its weight of SUP by
its total weight.
The percentage of SUP in product packaging reported is
an enterprise-wide average, where each packaging unit’s
SUP percentage is weighted equally.
SUP is dened as plastic items designed to be used once
by the consumer before they are disposed.
Microsoft shall report a description of data sources used
to calculate the metric.
11
Area
Specied
Information Criteria Tables
Ecosystems Land protection Management’s criteria:
The Company shall disclose:
a. The total size in acres, as well as by country location of
all funded land as of the scal year ended.
b. The total size in acres, as well as by country location of
all protected land as of the scal year ended.
c. A description of the agreements with the third parties
related to funded land.
Funded land is dened as land for which the Company
has entered into agreements and made monetary
contributions to third parties to begin the process of
designating the land as protected land (that is, the legal
status as protected land is not obtained yet).
Protected land is dened as funded land that has become
legally designated as being permanently protected by
government regulation.
Total size in acres is calculated as the sum of Microsoft’s
total monetary contribution amount for each executed
agreement divided by the cost per acre as determined
by the third-party organization within each executed
agreement. These amounts are net of overhead costs.
12
Environmental Data Fact Sheet 2024
20
1.11 Independent accountant’s review report
Deloitte & Touche LLP
1015 Second Avenue Suite 500
Seatt
le, WA 98104-1126
USA
To the Board of Directors of Microsoft Corporation
We have reviewed management of Microsoft Corporation’s (the “Company”) assertion that the specied information included in Section 1 of the 2023 Environmental Data Fact Sheet (“Fact Sheet”) as of and for the scal year ended
June 30, 2023 is presented in accordance with the criteria set forth in Section 1.10, Reporting criteria in the Fact Sheet. The Company’s management is responsible for its assertion. Our responsibility is to express a conclusion on
management’s assertion based on our review.
Our review was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certied Public Accountants (AICPA) in AT-C Section 105, Concepts Common to All Attestation Engagements, and AT-C Section
210, Review Engagements. Those standards require that we plan and perform the review to obtain limited assurance about whether any material modications should be made to management’s assertion in order for it to be fairly stated.
The procedures performed in a review vary in nature and timing from and are substantially less in extent than, an examination, the objective of which is to obtain reasonable assurance about whether management’s assertion is fairly
stated, in all material respects, in order to express an opinion. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Because of the limited nature of the engagement, the level of assurance obtained in a review is substantially lower than the
assurance that would have been obtained had an examination been performed. We believe that the review evidence obtained is sucient and appropriate to provide a reasonable basis for our conclusion.
W
e are required to be independent and to meet our other ethical responsibilities in accordance with relevant ethical requirements in accordance with the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct. We applied the Statements on Quality
Contro
l Standards established by the AICPA and, accordingly, maintain a comprehensive system of quality control.
The procedures we performed were based on our professional judgment. In performing our review, we performed analytical procedures, inquiries, and other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. For a selection
of the s
pecied information included in the Fact Sheet, we performed tests of mathematical accuracy of computations, compared the specied information to underlying records, or observed the data collection process.
The preparation of the specied information included in the Fact Sheet requires management to establish and interpret the criteria, make determinations as to the relevancy of information to be included, and make estimates and
assumptions that aect the reported information. Measurement of certain amounts includes estimates and assumptions that are subject to substantial inherent measurement uncertainty, including for example, the accuracy and
precision of conversion factors or estimation methodologies used by management. Obtaining sucient appropriate review evidence to support our conclusion does not reduce the inherent uncertainty in the specied information
included in the Fact Sheet. The selection by management of dierent but acceptable measurement methods, input data, or assumptions, may have resulted in materially dierent amounts for the specied information being reported.
Information outside of the specied information included in Section 1 of the 2023 Environmental Data Fact Sheet was not subject to our review and, accordingly, we do not express a conclusion or any form of assurance on such
information. Further, any information relating to: i) periods prior to the year-ended June 30, 2023 or ii) information relating to forward looking statements, targets, goals, and progress against goals, was not subject to our review and,
accordingly, we do not express a conclusion or any form of assurance on such information.
Based on our review, we are not aware of any material modications that should be made to management of Microsoft Corporation’s assertion that the specied information included in Section 1 of the 2023 Environmental Data Fact
Sheet a
s of and for the scal year ended June 30, 2023 is presented in accordance with the criteria set forth in Section 1.10, Reporting criteria in the Fact Sheet, in order for it to be fairly stated.
May 15, 2024
Environmental Data Fact Sheet 2024
21
Section 2:
Additional environmental metrics
Table 13 – Other emissions (metric tons)
FY20 FY21 FY22
FY23
NO
x
emissions
202 284 259
273
SO
x
emissions
12 18 16
20
VOC emissions
170
248 221
232
PM emissions
8 11
10 10
C
O emissions
1,584 2,392 2,074
2,148
Ozone depleting substances
0 0 0 0
Table 14 – Electricity consumption by region (MWh)
FY20 FY21 FY22
FY23
T
otal electricity consumed
10,770,714 13,621,517 18,153,454 23,567,502
Asia 1,376,247 1,686,032 2,629,500 3,580,261
Europe, Middle East, Africa 2,236,689 2,999,880 4,226,715 5,730,263
Latin America 114,199 179,197 330,254 481,758
North America 7,043,579 8,756,408 10,966,985 13,775,220
Table 15 – Renewable electricity consumption by region (MWh)
1,2
FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23
Total renewable electricity purchased
10,244,377 12,969,393 18,153,454
23,567,502
Asia
1,225,534 1,473,254 2,629,500 3,5
80,261
Euro
pe, Middle East, Africa
2,102,486 2,801,332 4,226,715
5,730,263
Latin America
113,456 174,762 330,254
481,758
North America
6,802,901 8,520,045 10,966,985
13,775,220
Table 16 – Non-renewable energy by region (MWh)
FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23
Total non-renewable energy purchased
and consumed
1,039,125 1,164,594 491,417 440,366
Asia 175,589 239,490 29,351 39,756
Europe, Middle East, Africa 422,093 522,878 311,751 205,932
Latin America 14,651 19,586 13,823 12,457
North America 426,792 382,640 136,492 182,221
1. Reported values represent Microsoft’s total renewable electricity consumption expressed in MWh from onsite,
renewable energy credits, power purchase agreements (PPAs), and green power tari programs. Values reect
Microsoft’s renewable electricity at the time of reporting.
2. For a breakdown on renewable electricity by technology type, see our latest CDP Climate Change response.
Environmental Data Fact Sheet 2024
22
Table 17 – Water withdrawal, consumption, and discharge detail (megaliters)
FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23
Total water withdrawal
7,936 8,068 10,706 12,951
By region Asia 1,681 2,051 2,858 3,616
Europe, Middle East, Africa 1,514 1,294 2,264 2,971
Latin America 110 183 325 484
North America 4,631 4,540 5,259 5,880
Total water consumption 4,196 4,773 6,399 7,844
By region Asia 1,042 1,285 1,872 2,463
Europe, Middle East, Africa 752 697 1,227 1,700
Latin America 74 128 231 351
North America 2,328 2,663 3,069 3,330
By source Third party 4,169 4,764 6,394 7,841
Surface water 25 4 4 2
Ground water 2 5 1 1
Total water discharges 3,740 3,295 4,307 5,107
By region Asia 639 766 985 1,153
Europe, Middle East, Africa 762 598 1,037 1,217
Latin America 36 55 94 133
North America 2,303 1,876 2,191 2,550
Table 18 – Verication/assurance
FY20 FY21-FY23
Data for this period of time was third-party veried by APEX using a
limited level of assurance. Following please nd the criteria used to
measure the carbon, energy, and water information:
For carbon and energy
World Resources Institute (WRI)/World Business Council for Sustainable
Development (WBCSD) Greenhouse Gas Protocol, Corporate Accounting
and Reporting Standard, revised edition, including Scope 2 Guidance
amendment (Scope 1 & 2); WRI/WBCSD Greenhouse Gas Protocol
Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard
(Scope 3).
For water
CDP Water Security Reporting Guidance
The scope of the verication included GHG emissions for Scope 1, Scope
2, Scope 3 business air travel, total energy consumption, total electricity
consumption, total renewable electricity consumption, total osets
purchased, total water withdrawals, total water consumption, and total
water discharges. For FY20, the rest of Scope 3 category emissions
identied as relevant were also included. Latest data adjustments
highlighted in this report made to historic data were outside of the scope
of these previous years’ review.
Any revisions made to FY20 reported values on this report were outside
of the limited assurance review done by APEX.
Microsoft obtains limited third-
party assurance for the most
recent year (FY23) prior to the
issuance of the Environmental
Data Fact Sheet. The limited
assurance reviews performed by
Deloitte & Touche LLP in FY21
and FY22 do not contemplate
the re visions to the prior year
metrics and therefore Deloitte
& Touche LLP provides no
assurance related to the revisions
consistent with our policies
disclosed in Section 1.8
This fact sheet is for informational purposes only and includes estimates, projections, and other “forward-
looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Section 27A of the
Securities Act of 1933, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. These forward-looking statements
generally are identied by the words “believe,” “project,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “intend,” “strategy,”
“future,” “opportunity,” “plan,” “may,” “should,” “will,” “would,” “will be,” “will continue,” “will likely result,” and
similar expressions. Forward-looking statements are based on current expectations and assumptions that are
subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to dier materially. Microsoft describes risks and
uncertainties that could cause actual results and events to dier materially in our reports led with the Securities
and Exchange Commission. We undertake no obligation to update or revise publicly any forward-looking
statements, whether because of new information, future events, or otherwise.
