Prepare EPD Data for Hyperscaler and Accord Demands

Why data‑center buyers are turning the screws

Data centers are expanding, which drags embodied carbon into the spotlight. The IEA projects data center electricity use could reach 620 to 1,050 TWh by 2026, a signal that procurement will keep pressing for verified carbon data at product level (IEA, 2024). Manufacturers that show rigorous EPDs win time and trust.

The accords, decoded into procurement expectations

Industry groups such as the iMasons Climate Accord have rallied hyperscalers and suppliers around consistent carbon accounting and material disclosure. The common thread is not slogans. It is comparable EPD data that maps cleanly to scopes, sites, and product variants that enter data‑center builds.

From slogans to fields buyers actually review

Procurement teams read EPDs like structured datasets. Make sure these show up in a standard, machine‑readable way:

• Product and variant identification that ties to SKUs and catalog taxonomies
• Plant location with electricity mix and recycled content inputs
• Declared unit and mass, plus density if the category needs it
• Impact results for required indicators across the declared modules
• PCR name and version, program operator, verifier, reference year, and cut‑off rules

Get life‑cycle coverage right the first time

State clearly whether results are cradle‑to‑gate, cradle‑to‑site, cradle‑to‑grave, or circular models with declared reuse. For data‑center packages, many buyers expect A1 to A3 at minimum and increasingly request A4 transport and A5 installation scenarios to avoid guesswork in bids. Gaps here create back‑and‑forth that slows awards.

Verification that passes procurement sniff tests

Third‑party verification aligned with ISO 14025 and EN 15804 is table stakes. Under EN 15804+A2, EPDs report 13 core impact category indicators, which is a jump from older sets and a common reason submittals bounce if fields are missing (EPD International, 2024). Put scenarios and assumptions up front so reviewers can trace them quickly.

The metadata layer buyers search by

EPDs that are accurate but hard to find still lose. Include facility IDs, product families, MasterFormat codes, and geography so your materials appear in buyer portals and shortlists. Consistent naming reduces rework and keeps variants from being wrongly excluded. It also helps when teams roll up carbon at the package level.

Map requirements to your actual catalog

Start with a simple grid that lists each hyperscaler ask on one axis and your product lines on the other. Note which modules, indicators, and fields you already provide, then mark the missing ones. This converts a fuzzy request into an actionable data plan that quality teams can own. It is boring work and also the work that wins specs.

Automate the checks, keep humans on the hard parts

Use a platform that benchmarks current EPDs against hyperscaler criteria, flags missing modules or indicators, and tracks PCR updates. Pair that automation with a white‑glove data‑collection team that pulls utility bills, transport routes, and yield losses from the plants. We prefer tools that publish with the program operator the manufacturer chooses, since buyers do not favor one logo over another when verification is equivalent.

What strong preparation looks like in an RFP

Teams arrive with a bill of materials mapped to EPDs that share the same declared unit and scope. Transport and installation scenarios are pre‑agreed so estimators do not invent numbers under pressure. Variant coverage is explicit, which stops substitution churn. Reviewers see the same fields every time and move faster as a result.

A quick note on policy context

Federal incentives shifted in early 2025, so many construction bids lean even more on private buyer rules rather than national Buy Clean templates. That puts hyperscaler criteria in the driver seat. Treat them as the de facto standard for embodied‑carbon EPD data in digital infrastructure.

A couple of numbers that often trip teams up

If you still publish to older indicator sets, plan a refresh to the A2 requirements so your results show all 13 indicators for the declared modules (EPD International, 2024). CSRD reporting will touch about 50,000 companies in the EU, which pulls more suppliers into standardized carbon disclosures that mirror EPD habits (European Commission, 2024). That is definately a nudge to align your formats now.

Put it together without burning cycles

Build a living inventory of plant data, impacts by module, and verification artifacts. Automate gap checks against named buyer criteria, then schedule refreshes tied to PCR changes and reference year rollovers. The result is a portfolio that stays acceptable for future RFPs, protects revenue, and frees engineering to focus on performance rather than paperwork.