EPD Best Practices and Pain Points

In Parts 1 and 2 of this series, we covered what Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) are and how they are created. But for most organizations, the real challenge isn’t understanding the process, but executing it efficiently. From interpreting PCR requirements to collecting data and navigating verification, small missteps can quickly lead to delays and rework in your EPD process.

In the final post of this series, we'll break down the most common pitfalls teams encounter when producing EPDs, and the best practices that help you avoid them, streamline the process, and scale from a single EPD to a repeatable, portfolio-wide system.

Common EPD Process Pitfalls and Pain Points

While the concept of an EPD is straightforward, the process can be challenging, especially for first-time teams. Most issues arise not from the calculations themselves, but from interpreting requirements, collecting data, and preparing for verification. Understanding these common challenges can help organizations plan ahead and avoid delays.

Interpreting the PCR Incorrectly: PCRs define how the LCA and report must be structured. Misinterpretation or incomplete alignment can lead to revisions during verification, adding time and rework.

Data Collection Delays: Collecting the necessary data from facilities and suppliers is typically the most time-consuming part of the EPD process. Data is often scattered across internal teams and external partners and can be hard to track down. Starting data collection early and clearly communicating requirements to relevant teams can significantly reduce delays.

Building a Defensible LCA Model: Translating data into a lifecycle model requires selecting appropriate datasets, handling shared processes, and aligning with PCR rules. Verifiers will review assumptions, data sources, and methodology in detail, so clear documentation and transparency are essential to avoid delays.

Scaling Across Product Lines: For companies with large product portfolios, building a separate model for each product can quickly become inefficient. Without structured modeling approaches, organizations may find it difficult to reuse models or update results when designs change. This is why many companies aim to build reusable lifecycle models that can support multiple EPDs over time.

Why Traditional EPD Workflows Break Down

For many organizations, the first EPD reveals how complex the process can be. Data must be gathered from multiple sources, lifecycle models must be carefully built, and every assumption must be documented for verification. In traditional workflows, this work is often managed across spreadsheets, disconnected LCA tools, and long email chains. As a result, teams commonly face:

• scattered product and manufacturing data

• difficulty selecting appropriate lifecycle datasets

• unclear documentation of modeling assumptions

• repeated revisions during verification

• limited ability to reuse models across product lines

Even after publication, updating models or scaling across product lines can be difficult. As demand for environmental transparency grows, organizations need a more efficient way to build, maintain, and verify lifecycle models in order to turn them into credible disclosures like EPDs.

Best Practices for a Streamlined EPD Process

While creating an EPD can be complex, organizations that approach it methodically can avoid common delays. The most successful EPD projects focus on clear scope, structured data, strong documentation, and future scalability.

Start with the Right PCR: Confirm the applicable PCR before collecting data. It defines system boundaries, required data, and how impacts must be calculated. Getting this wrong early leads to rework later.

Define the Product Scope Clearly: Establish the declared unit, system boundaries, and product variants upfront. A clear definition ensures the model accurately represents the product and avoids confusion during verification.

Focus on High-Impact Data First: In many LCAs, the majority of environmental impact comes from materials and manufacturing processes. Prioritizing accurate data collection in these areas will improve the quality of the results. Where possible, collect primary data from your own facilities rather than relying entirely on secondary datasets.

Engage Suppliers Early: Critical inputs such as material composition require information from suppliers. Engaging suppliers early in the process can prevent delays later and help ensure the information collected aligns with PCR requirements.

Document Assumptions Transparently: Every lifecycle model involves making assumptions where there are gaps in your data. Clear documentation of these assumptions during the modeling process makes verification significantly smoother and reduces back-and-forth.

Plan for Model Reuse: Structure models so they can be easily updated with new information for future EPDs. Companies that treat the LCA model as a long-term asset can use it to evaluate design changes, track environmental improvements, and support future product declarations.

These best practices can significantly reduce friction in the EPD process. However, many organizations still struggle with the complexity of managing data, building lifecycle models, and preparing verification-ready documentation using traditional tools. Organizations increasingly need a way to structure product data, build lifecycle models efficiently, and move seamlessly from modeling to verification and publication. This is where purpose-built tools can significantly improve the efficiency and scalability of the EPD process.

Why CarbonGraph Works for EPDs

As this guide has shown, producing an EPD requires navigating PCR requirements, collecting structured data, building a defensible model, and passing verification. In traditional workflows, this work is often spread across spreadsheets, LCA tools, and email chains, making the process slow, difficult to scale, and prone to long rework cycles.

CarbonGraph was designed specifically to streamline this LCA-to-EPD workflow, helping organizations move efficiently from product data to verified environmental disclosures. CarbonGraph models align with LCA and EPD standards including ISO 14040/44, ISO21930, and EN15804, and are used across materials, manufacturing, and consumer product sectors.

Built Around the Real EPD Process: CarbonGraph mirrors the actual steps required to produce an EPD—from PCR interpretation to data collection, modeling, and documentation. This ensures models are structured correctly from the start and aligned with verification requirements.

Reduce Time to First EPD by 50-70%: CarbonGraph helps translate product data such as bills of materials, manufacturing inputs, and transport into structured lifecycle models. This reduces manual model setup time, improves consistency, and accelerates model development.

Pass Verification with Fewer Iterations: Documentation is structured as the model is built, including datasets, assumptions, and methodology. This makes verification smoother and reduces back-and-forth during review.

Direct Integration with Program Operators: CarbonGraph enables models and documentation to be shared directly with partner program operators and verifiers. This streamlines communication, improves transparency, and accelerates the path to publication.

Go from One EPD to Portfolio Coverage: Whether you need one EPD or one hundred, reusable lifecycle models allow teams to expand EPD coverage across product lines and update results as products evolve. This supports consistent, scalable environmental transparency.

Turning Environmental Data Into Strategic Insight

An Environmental Product Declaration is often the starting point of a company’s environmental transparency journey. The lifecycle model built to produce the EPD contains detailed information about lifecycle impacts.

After the EPD is completed with CarbonGraph, your business owns and controls this model. Rather than being locked away in a static report, it can be expanded and refined over time to support ongoing analysis, product updates, and strategic decision-making.

This enables organizations to:

• update impacts as product designs or manufacturing processes evolve

• create additional EPDs for related products or variants

• identify environmental hotspots across the lifecycle

• evaluate improvements in materials, energy use, or logistics

By maintaining access to the underlying model, companies can turn environmental disclosure into a living system for product insight and continuous improvement.

Let’s Get Started

Environmental Product Declarations are becoming a core tool for environmental transparency, procurement, and product strategy. But producing them requires a structured process, from interpreting PCR requirements and collecting product data to building lifecycle models and navigating verification.

CarbonGraph connects these steps into a single workflow, helping organizations move efficiently from product data to verified environmental declarations. By simplifying lifecycle modeling, accelerating verification, and enabling long-term model ownership, CarbonGraph helps companies not only publish EPDs, but build the foundation for scalable environmental transparency across their entire product portfolio.

For organizations beginning their first EPD, or scaling environmental transparency across their products, having the right tools and workflows in place can make all the difference. Get in touch with us to get started on your EPD journey.