Embodied Carbon: The New Hyperscaler RFP Filter
Hyperscalers are quietly culling bid lists with one line item. If your concrete, steel, glass, or insulation cannot prove its numbers in a verified EPD and hit a max GWP, your proposal never makes the shortlist. This is not a trend piece. It is a procurement reality that decides who gets onto the campus and who waits outside the fence.
Why your bid disappears without a trace
Embodied carbon has become the spam filter of data center RFPs. Teams run quick screens for product‑specific, third‑party verified EPDs and target GWPs. Miss either, and your bid lands in the junk folder long before price is discussed.
The market signal is loud
LEED v5 pushes embodied carbon to the front of project requirements, with decarbonization across materials now a central impact area that owners use to shape specs (USGBC, 2025). California’s Buy Clean rules add hard ceilings for steel, rebar, glass, and insulation on public work, which private buyers often mirror in their own contracts (DGS, 2025) (California DGS, 2025).
Hyperscalers are rewriting the materials playbook
Microsoft is building hybrid mass‑timber data centers and reports 35 percent lower embodied carbon than conventional steel builds, and 65 percent lower than typical precast concrete for those sites (Microsoft, 2024). Meta has removed concrete from certain duct bank designs and is piloting mixes that cut concrete footprints by more than 30 percent across applications (Meta Sustainability, 2024). AWS states dozens of sites using lower‑carbon concrete and steel, with measurable CO2e savings across its program (AWS, 2023).
Collaboration is codifying expectations
The Open Compute Project ran a joint field trial with AWS, Google, Meta, and Microsoft to test low‑embodied carbon slab mixes, targeting greater than 50 percent per‑yard reductions, and plans a public white paper for specifiers (OCP and WJE, 2024). The iMasons Climate Accord published a 2025 maturity model that explicitly steers buying decisions toward lower‑carbon materials and equipment (iMasons, 2025).
What actually gets screened
Owners check three things fast: do you have an up‑to‑date product‑specific EPD, does it follow the right PCR and verification rules, and does the declared A1 to A3 GWP clear the project’s threshold for that material category. Many teams pull this data straight into EC3 to compare suppliers side by side (Building Transparency, 2025).
Concrete, steel, glass, insulation, timber, and MEP
If you supply ready‑mix or precast, expect prescribed cement‑replacement ranges, SCM provenance, and curing performance alongside the EPD. For steel, new industry EPDs show meaningful GWP declines, which resets what counts as competitive. Flat glass and insulation are increasingly called with max GWP lines that reference public thresholds. Mass timber is moving from admin buildings toward core spaces on some campuses, which shifts the baseline bill of materials and the carbon math.
Build your Bid‑Ready Carbon Pack
- Product‑specific EPDs per plant and mix or per product line, verified to ISO 14025, aligned to the dominant PCR in your competitive set.
- A clear mix or alloy menu that meets common GWP targets, with mill or plant attestations ready on letterhead.
- Rapid submittal templates that map EPD fields to EC3, plus a short variance memo when a project asks for A4 or A5 adders.
- A timeline to refresh EPDs before the 5‑year mark, and to rebase to newer PCRs when they publish.
- One contact who owns data requests across operations, procurement, and QA so response times stay under 48 hours.
Pitfalls that trigger instant no‑go
Expired or industry‑average EPDs where the RFP calls for product‑specific. Gaps in plant coverage that hide hot spots. Concrete submittals that tout low cement but cannot meet cure time or strength windows. Steel EPDs that omit fabrication impacts when the buyer asks for them. These are avoidable, yet they still trip teams up.
How to choose your LCA and EPD partner
Pick a team that can collect data from inside your org without hijacking your best engineers, compare PCR options your competitors use, and publish with the operator your customer prefers, for example Smart EPD in the US or IBU in Europe. Speed, completeness, and dependable QA matter more than a rock‑bottom fee because the real cost is the project you do not win. Fees are negotiated case by case, and should be dwarfed by even a single mid‑sized campus award.
Timelines that match bid cycles
Most manufacturers can build a compliant, product‑specific EPD on a recent twelve‑month reference year within a typical bid window if the data path is clear. For new product launches, a prospective EPD with three months of production data can keep you in play, then you update once a full year is available. Do not wait for the perfect dataset, get the verified declaration in hand.
The commercial bottom line
Embodied carbon is no longer a sustainability nice‑to‑have, it is the pre‑qualification line. Show a verified EPD with numbers that clear the bar, and you are in the room where scope and price are negotiated. Show up without one, and you are definately negotiating with yourself outside. The companies that operationalize EPDs now will be the ones still getting called when the next hyperscale campus drops.
References: USGBC LEED v5 (2025) linked above. California DGS BCCA GWP limits (2025) linked above. OCP and WJE low‑carbon concrete trial for hyperscalers (2024) linked above. Additional reading cited here without links: Microsoft wood data center initiative (Microsoft, 2024), Meta low‑carbon concrete program (Meta Sustainability, 2024), EC3 overview (Building Transparency, 2025), iMasons Climate Accord Maturity Model (iMasons, 2025).
Frequently Asked Questions
Do hyperscaler RFPs actually set maximum GWP numbers, or do they just ask for EPDs?
Both appear in practice. Public policies like California’s BCCA publish explicit GWP ceilings that private owners often mirror in contract language, and EPDs are the proof mechanism for those thresholds (California DGS, 2025).
Are industry‑average EPDs acceptable for these bids?
Often no. Private RFPs and public rules increasingly prefer product‑specific EPDs that represent a single product and plant. Industry‑average EPDs can help in early design, but they rarely satisfy pass‑fail screens.
Which databases do specifiers use to check our numbers?
Teams commonly use EC3 to compare EPDs by product and geography. Keep your declarations easy to map to EC3 fields to avoid delays (Building Transparency, 2025).
Do we need to refresh EPDs before they expire?
Yes. A five‑year validity is typical, and many buyers will not accept materials if declarations will lapse before delivery. Plan refresh windows to avoid bid‑cycle gaps.
Will LEED v5 force us to cut embodied carbon on every project?
LEED v5 elevates embodied carbon across prerequisites and credits, which owners translate into their specs and RFPs. It raises expectations for measurement and reduction strategies (USGBC, 2025).
About the Author
Walker Ryan is a climate-tech entrepreneur focused on driving industrial decarbonization through better data. As the founder and CEO of Parq, he helps manufacturers generate high-quality, third-party–verified carbon disclosures at scale—accelerating a traditionally slow and expensive process. Before starting Parq, Walker led over $200 million in sustainability-focused investments as VP of Strategy & Growth at ReStream Solutions, following earlier experience in investment banking at Deutsche Bank. He brings a rare mix of capital markets expertise and hands-on sustainability knowledge to tackling the infrastructure of industrial emissions.
