Skip to main content
Search within the site

Calculation Method for Avoided
Emissions

Konica Minolta's Approach to Avoided Emissions

Konica Minolta quantifies the contribution of its products to reducing GHG* emissions in its customers' supply chains as "avoided emissions." By expanding these avoided emissions, the Company aims to achieve both the resolution of social issues and business growth.

*GHG: Greenhouse gas

Avoided GHG emissions* are an indicator of the GHG reduction achieved by introducing a product, calculated by comparison with a reference scenario in which the product is not introduced. In calculating avoided emissions, Konica Minolta refers to the Guidance on Avoided Emissions v2.0 (hereinafter, the "WBCSD Guidance") issued by the WBCSD.

*Avoided GHG emissions: In accordance with the terminology used in the WBCSD Guidance, greenhouse gas emissions, including CO2, are expressed on this page in terms of CO2 equivalent (CO2e). "Avoided CO2 emissions," which Konica Minolta has established as a non-financial target, has the same meaning as avoided GHG emissions.

Furthermore, Konica Minolta quantifies the contribution of its products to reducing natural resource* usage in its customers' supply chains as the contribution to natural resource usage reduction. The contribution to natural resource usage reduction is calculated using the weight of raw materials procured determined during the calculation of avoided GHG emissions.

*Natural resources: Resources that involve new extraction, such as crude oil and mineral resources, and are generally synonymous with exhaustible resources.

Concept of Avoided GHG Emissions
Conceptual diagram of avoided emissions, with time on the horizontal axis and GHG emissions on the vertical axis. Under the reference scenario without the product, emissions keep rising, whereas under the scenario with a Konica Minolta product emissions decrease; the difference between the two scenarios, shown as the area on the graph, represents the avoided emissions.

Avoided GHG emissions are fundamentally different from Konica Minolta's Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions and cannot be used to justify delaying the achievement of Scope 1, 2, and 3 reduction targets or to offset Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions.
In addition, based on the WBCSD Guidance, Konica Minolta verifies the following for all products for which avoided emissions are calculated:

  • In calculating avoided GHG emissions, Konica Minolta confirms that the product passes the three Eligibility Gates*1.
  • Avoided GHG emissions are not used to offset Konica Minolta's GHG emissions inventory or product CFP*2, or to make net-zero claims.
  • For all products, no trade-offs (worsening of environmental aspects during the product lifecycle outside the scope evaluated for avoided emissions) or rebounds (an increase in lifecycle GHG emissions due to increased adoption of the product that exceeds the avoided GHG emissions) have been identified.
  • There is no internationally standardized methodology for calculating avoided emissions, leaving room for interpretation by individual companies. Furthermore, uncertainties remain in establishing hypotheses for reference scenarios and assumptions, as well as in the use of secondary data.
  • When Konica Minolta supplies only intermediate products, the WBCSD Guidance leaves it optional to determine how the avoided emissions generated by the final product are allocated. To avoid overestimating its own contribution while appropriately evaluating the impact of its products with competitive advantages, Konica Minolta determines the contribution ratio according to the following flowchart.
Flowchart for Determining Contribution Ratio
Flowchart for determining the attribution rate. In (1) verification of the validity of the contribution, a product is excluded from the calculation if its contribution to reducing GHG emissions in the supply chain cannot be explained quantitatively with a clear causal relationship. If it can, the flow moves to (2) verification of intermediate products, where the attribution rate is set at 100% if the product alone is the starting point of the GHG reduction (Yes). If not (No), the flow moves to (3) verification of substitutability, where the rate is set at 100% if the product has the top share in the target market or contributes to GHG reduction through proprietary technology (Yes); otherwise (No) the rate is set individually based on general information such as the market size of the final and intermediate products.

*1:Three Eligibility Gates: Three mandatory requirements under the WBCSD Guidance that must be satisfied when claiming a product's avoided emissions.

  • Gate 1:The company sets GHG emission reduction targets aligned with a 1.5°C trajectory and reports performance.
  • Gate 2:The claimed reduction effect is scientifically proven.
  • Gate 3:The company explains the causal relationship demonstrating that the product delivers sufficient avoided emissions.

*2:Product CFP (Carbon Footprint): The amount of CO2 emitted during the lifecycle of a product, from raw material procurement to disposal.

FY2025 Results

In FY2025, the avoided GHG emissions from products sold by Konica Minolta reached 1,118 thousand t-CO2e*, and the percentage of revenue accounted for by products generating avoided GHG emissions was approximately 10%.

*CO2e: A unit expressing the amount of GHG (greenhouse gas) converted to the equivalent amount of CO2 that produces the same global warming potential.

Avoided GHG Emissions by Product
Target ProductsAvoided GHG Emissions
Digital Printing Press809 thousand t-CO2e*
Cinema Projector Lens178 thousand t-CO2e
Hyperspectral Imaging Camera67 thousand t-CO2e
Inkjet System for Solder Resist Application
Inkjet Printhead for Commercial Printing		62 thousand t-CO2e
Anti-Reflection Film for OLED TVs0.86 thousand t-CO2e
Total1,118 thousand t-CO2e

*The annual avoided GHG emissions of Accurio series digital printing presses are subject to third-party assurance in the Environmental Data (PDF).

Detailed Calculation Methods for Each Product and Solution

Digital Printing Press Accurio Series

Target Solution

Digital Printing Press Accurio Series

Comparison Target

Average Sheetfed Offset Printing Press on the Market

FY2025 Avoided Emissions

Annual avoided GHG emissions: 809 thousand t-CO2e/year*

*This result is subject to third-party assurance in the Environmental Data (PDF).

Annual contribution to natural resource usage reduction: 404 thousand tons/year

Overview

Digital printing is a technology that prints directly onto paper from digital data without the use of printing plates. Compared to offset printing, it eliminates the need for plate making and minimizes color adjustment during setup, thereby contributing to GHG reductions associated with plate procurement as well as waste paper (paper that does not become part of the finished product) generated during test printing and color adjustments, particularly in short-run printing.

Comparison of Offset and Digital Printing Processes
Flowchart comparing the offset and digital printing processes. Offset printing requires data creation and plate making, including material production, in the prepress stage, and plate changing, setting and color adjustment, including paper production and test printing, in the printing stage, whereas a digital printing system goes straight from data creation to printing and needs no plate making, plate changing, setting or color adjustment.

Calculation Formula

Calculation Formula for Avoided GHG Emissions of Digital Printing Presses
Diagram of the formula for calculating the avoided emissions of digital printing presses. Annual avoided emissions in t-CO₂e are obtained by subtracting the life cycle GHG emissions of printed matter produced by digital printing from those produced by offset printing, dividing by the number of pages of printed matter in A4 equivalent, and multiplying by the annual number of sheets printed per press in A4 equivalent and the number of presses in operation in the market.

Assumptions

  • This calculation references SuMPO EPD's PCR "Publishing, Commercial and General Security Printed Matters [6th Edition]" in order to comprehensively cover the life cycle of the target printed materials and align the calculation conditions for digital and offset printing.

    Publishing, Commercial and General Security Printed Matters [6th Edition](Japanese Only)opens in a new window

  • Avoided GHG emissions are calculated by evaluating the difference in life cycle GHG emissions between the target solution and the comparison target when each is used to print 150-250 copies (with the assumed print volume set for each model category) of a 48-page, A4-size color brochure.
  • Under the above PCR, the calculation scope for avoided GHG emissions covers raw material procurement (plates, printing paper, ink, etc.) and the manufacturing stage (printing process) required to produce the printed materials. Processes following the transportation of printed materials are considered identical for both and are omitted from the calculation.
Calculation Scope for Life Cycle GHG Emissions of Printed Materials in Calculating Avoided GHG Emissions from Digital Printing Presses
Diagram of the calculation boundary used for the avoided emissions of digital printing presses. The boundary, inside the dotted line, covers material procurement such as raw materials, DTP materials, plate materials, developer, paper, ink, other consumables, wire and packaging materials, and the printing processes of production, DTP, plate making, platesetting, printing, cutting, binding and packaging. The subsequent transportation, use and disposal stages lie outside the boundary.
  • Reductions in inventory loss are excluded from the calculation due to high uncertainty.
  • GHG emissions from raw material procurement, manufacturing, transportation, and disposal of the printing presses themselves are not included in this calculation. However, Konica Minolta has confirmed that there is no significant difference between offset and digital printing presses in these emissions compared with those from the printing process, and that the difference in GHG emissions from printing accounts for a large proportion of the overall difference.

Timeframe

The calculation period is one year (FY2025). Assuming that products sold over the four years since FY2022 are operating in the market, the total effect attributable to Konica Minolta's products is calculated by multiplying the effect per unit by the number of units operating in the market.

Analysis Results

The first chart below plots the calculated GHG emissions per A4 sheet for various print volumes. The smaller the print volume (short run), the larger the difference in GHG emissions. The second chart below shows the results for a print run of 250 copies, as assumed in the calculation. The primary drivers of the difference are the procurement of aluminum for printing plates, as well as the paper and electricity used during test printing.

Relationship Between Print Volume and GHG per Sheet*1
Line graph showing the relationship between the number of copies printed, from 0 to 2,000 on the horizontal axis, and GHG emissions per sheet in g-CO₂e on the vertical axis. For both offset printing in blue and digital printing in purple, emissions per sheet fall as the number of copies rises, but the gap is wider for smaller lots. Offset printing is high at about 300 g-CO₂e for small runs, while digital printing settles at a low level early on; at the assumed 250 copies marked by the dotted line, digital printing is well below offset printing.
Life Cycle GHG Emissions of Printed Materials*1
Graph comparing the life cycle GHG emissions of printed matter produced by offset printing and by digital printing

*1:The graph is based on data for the B2 inkjet press. Other models show a similar trend.

Avoided GHG Emissions by Digital Printing Press Model
Model CategoryComparison TargetAssumed Print VolumeAvoided GHG Emissions per A4 Sheet*2
B2 Inkjet PressFull-Size Sheetfed Offset Press250 copies50.6 g-CO2e/sheet
A3 Electrophotographic Digital Press (High-Speed Class)Half-Size Sheetfed Offset Press200 copies63.6 g-CO2e/sheet
A3 Electrophotographic Digital Press (Mid-Speed Class)Half-Size Sheetfed Offset Press150 copies85.3 g-CO2e/sheet

*2:The avoided GHG emissions per A4 sheet are the average of the values calculated for models in the same category.

Calculation Basis

  • The target printed material (a 48-page, A4-size color brochure) is based on average data registered with SuMPO EPD under the aforementioned PCR.
  • Print volumes are modeled based on Konica Minolta's measurements and multiple publicly available sources.
  • Taking errors in post-printing processes into account, a 1% allowance is included in the calculation for digital printing presses.
    On the other hand, offset presses are known to conventionally print 5–10% extra due to the high cost of reprinting. Therefore, a 5% allowance is included in the calculation for offset presses.
  • Digital printing accounts for 15–20% of the printing market, with analog printing remaining mainstream. Therefore, an average sheetfed offset printing press in the market was selected as the comparison target. Although the share of digital printing is expected to grow by approximately 5 percentage points from 2020 to 2025, findings based on the sales scale and usage of digital printing presses confirm that digital printing presses are generating new demand by serving as alternatives to offset presses, particularly in short-run printing.

Assessment Based on the WBCSD Guidance

  • In this calculation, Konica Minolta has confirmed that the three Eligibility Gates are satisfied:
    Gate 1: Konica Minolta's SBT net-zero target has been validated.
    Gate 2: This effect contributes to the "Energy Efficiency" and "Material Efficiency" mitigation measures identified in IPCC AR6.
    Gate 3: Based on the diagram above, GHG emissions are reduced mainly through reductions in printing plates and paper.
  • Konica Minolta has confirmed that no trade-offs occur because GHG emissions from raw material procurement, manufacturing, transportation, and disposal of the printing presses themselves do not differ significantly between offset and digital printing presses compared with emissions from the printing process, and the difference in GHG emissions from printing accounts for a large proportion of the overall difference.
  • The annual avoided GHG emissions of digital printing presses in this series are subject to third-party assurance in the Environmental Data (PDF).

    Third-Party Assurance

Limitations

These calculation results are based on the above assumptions, and actual GHG reduction effects will vary depending on operating conditions.

Cinema Projector Lens

Target Solution

Cinema laser-illuminated projectors using Konica Minolta lens units

Comparison Target

Cinema xenon-lamp projectors using market-average lens units

FY2025 Avoided Emissions

Annual avoided GHG emissions: 178 thousand t-CO2e/year

Overview

Projectors using laser light sources can project images with lower power consumption than conventional projectors using xenon light sources. Thanks to their ability to project high-definition images using laser light sources, Konica Minolta's lens units enable laser projectors to replace conventional xenon-lamp projectors. Konica Minolta's lenses command a market share of over 60% (estimated by Konica Minolta) in the market for DCI (Digital Cinema Initiatives)*1-compliant lenses for DLP (Digital Light Processing)*2 cinema projectors, making a major contribution to reducing GHG emissions associated with projector power consumption.

*1:An organization formed by five major Hollywood film studios that sets international standards for digital cinema projection.
DCI (Digital Cinema Initiatives)opens in a new window

*2:A projection technology widely used in digital cinema.

Diagram comparing a xenon-lamp projector with a laser-light-source projector. Each is shown as a product assembled from a lens and a light source, with the laser projector using a Konica Minolta lens conforming to the DCI standard. The bar graph on the right shows that the laser projector emits less CO₂ from electricity used during operation than the xenon-lamp projector.
Comparison Between Xenon-Lamp and Laser-Illuminated Projectors

Calculation Formula

Diagram of the formula for calculating the avoided emissions of cinema projector lenses. Annual avoided emissions in t-CO₂e are obtained by subtracting the GHG emissions from use of a laser-light-source cinema projector from those of a xenon-lamp projector, and multiplying by the annual operating hours and the number of laser projectors in operation in the market.
Calculation Formula for Avoided GHG Emissions of Cinema Projector Lenses

Assumptions

  • Avoided GHG emissions are calculated by evaluating the difference in GHG emissions when both the target solution and the comparison target are operated for 8 hours per day and 350 days per year.
  • The calculation scope is the use stage of the projector. GHG emissions from raw material procurement, manufacturing, transportation, and disposal are small compared with those from the use stage and are omitted from the calculation after confirming that there is little difference between the two types of projectors.
  • For the calculation, projector panel sizes are classified into three categories (small, medium, and large), and power consumption is averaged across multiple representative projector models for each size.
  • The avoided GHG emissions at the projector level are allocated to the lens.

Timeframe

The calculation period is one year (FY2025). Assuming that products sold since FY2017 operate over a product lifespan of 10 years, the total effect attributable to Konica Minolta's products is calculated by multiplying the effect per unit by the number of units operating in the market.

Analysis Results

The table below compares the power consumption (in kW) of laser-illuminated and xenon-lamp projectors for each panel size. Annual avoided GHG emissions are calculated by multiplying these figures by the corresponding number of projectors in operation in the market for each panel size.

Reduction in Power Consumption by Panel Size
Panel SizeApplicationPower Consumption Reduction through Laser Illumination
0.69Mini Theaters, Small Auditoriums, etc.△890 kW (59%)
0.98Standard Theaters△2,660 kW (37%)
1.38Premium Large-Screen Theaters△2,400 kW (69%)

Calculation Basis

  • Projector power consumption was calculated by selecting two laser-illuminated models and two xenon-lamp models for each panel size and taking the average.
  • Product lifespan was set to 10 years, as required for DCI-compliant lenses, assuming that the projector itself has an equivalent lifespan.
  • Operating hours were set assuming movie theaters operate daily, including holidays.
  • The number of units operating in the market for each panel size was estimated using internal survey data on the number of screens in the market and lens shipment volumes.
  • Considering market share trends for laser-illuminated and xenon-lamp projectors and the fact that the adoption of laser light sources has expanded since 2015, calculations assume that products sold in 2025 replace xenon-lamp projectors.

Assessment Based on the WBCSD Guidance

  • In this calculation, Konica Minolta has confirmed that the three Eligibility Gates are satisfied.
    Gate 1: Konica Minolta's SBT net-zero target has been validated.
    Gate 2: This effect contributes to the "Energy Efficiency" mitigation measure identified in IPCC AR6.
    Gate 3: Based on the diagram above, GHG emissions are reduced mainly through lower power consumption.
  • GHG emissions from raw material procurement, manufacturing, transportation, and disposal of cinema projectors are small compared with those from the use stage. Furthermore, since GHG emissions from laser-illuminated projectors are equal to or lower than those from xenon-lamp projectors at every life cycle stage, no trade-offs have been identified.
  • Avoided GHG emissions from cinema projector lenses are not subject to third-party assurance.

Limitations

These calculation results are based on the above assumptions; actual GHG reduction effects will vary depending on operating conditions.

Hyperspectral Imaging Camera

Target Solution

Plastic recycling system using hyperspectral imaging

Comparison Target

Conventional plastic recycling system

FY2025 Avoided Emissions

Annual avoided GHG emissions: 67 thousand t-CO2e/year

Annual contribution to natural resource usage reduction: 21 thousand tons/year

Overview

Achieving material recycling (MR) for plastics requires sorting resin types to a high level of purity. For general waste containing a mixture of various materials, conventional sorting methods alone cannot achieve sufficient purity, so the plastics are instead subjected to thermal recovery, resulting in CO2 emissions. Optical sorting using hyperspectral imaging (HSI) technology enables higher-purity resin sorting and contributes to reducing GHG emissions by replacing thermal recovery with material recycling.

Comparison of Processing Flows: Thermal Recovery vs. HSI-Enabled Material Recycling
Diagram comparing the conventional process centered on heat recovery with material recycling using HSI. In the conventional process, waste is sorted and incinerated to recover thermal energy, which emits GHG from combustion, and resin is supplied as virgin material. With HSI, waste is sorted by an HSI camera, pelletized and molded into recycled resin; the thermal energy previously obtained from heat recovery is made up by burning fuel, but replacing virgin resin with recycled resin contributes to reducing GHG emissions.

Calculation Formula

Calculation Formula for Avoided GHG Emissions of the HSI Camera
Diagram of the formula for calculating the avoided emissions of HSI cameras. Annual avoided emissions in t-CO₂e are obtained by subtracting the GHG emissions from material recycling of resin from those of heat recovery of resin, and multiplying by the volume of resin processed annually by one HSI camera, the share of heat recovery in processing in Europe, the share of resin actually sent to material recycling, and the number of HSI cameras in operation in the market.

Assumptions

  • Life cycle GHG differences are calculated based on the condition that the target solution operates 24 hours a day at an 80% operating rate for 250 days.
  • The calculation scope covers the process from waste collection and transportation through treatment. The calculation also includes the production required to compensate for the thermal energy obtained through thermal recovery and the resin obtained through MR when the respective treatment method is not selected.

Timeframe

  • The calculation period is one year (FY2025). Assuming that products sold in FY2020 and later operate over a 10-year product lifespan, the total effect attributable to Konica Minolta's products is calculated by multiplying the effect per unit by the number of units operating in the market.

Analysis Results

The table below compares life cycle CO2 emissions under the conventional method and with HSI implementation. Replacing thermal recovery with material recycling (MR) for one ton of plastic results in avoided GHG emissions of 3.20 t-CO2e.

Avoided GHG Emissions from HSI Implementation
Thermal RecoveryVirgin Plastic ProductionMRFuel CombustionTotal
Conventional Method3.222.49――5.71
With HSI――0.881.632.51
Difference3.20

Unit: t-CO2e

Calculation Basis

Assessment Based on the WBCSD Guidance

  • In this calculation, Konica Minolta has confirmed that the three Eligibility Gates are satisfied.
    Gate 1: Konica Minolta's SBT net-zero target has been validated.
    Gate 2: This effect contributes to the "Material Efficiency" mitigation measure identified in IPCC AR6.
    Gate 3: Based on the diagram above, GHG emissions are reduced mainly by replacing thermal recovery with MR.
  • No trade-offs were identified over the life cycle of this product.
  • Avoided GHG emissions from HSI cameras are not subject to third-party assurance.

Limitations

These calculation results are based on the above assumptions; actual GHG reduction effects will vary depending on operating conditions.

Inkjet System for Solder Resist Application

Target Solution

Solder resist formation on printed circuit boards using inkjet technology

Comparison Target

Solder resist formation on printed circuit boards using conventional methods

FY2025 Avoided Emissions

Annual avoided GHG emissions: 62 thousand t-CO2e/year*

Annual contribution to natural resource usage reduction: 31 thousand tons/year*

*Combined figures for inkjet products (inkjet systems for solder resist application and inkjet printheads for commercial printing).

Overview

In the photolithography method currently used for solder resist (SR) formation on printed circuit boards, solder resist is applied across the entire surface, the required areas are cured by UV exposure, and the solder resist in unnecessary areas is washed away. In contrast, the inkjet (IJ) method applies solder resist only to the required areas from the start. This shortens the process and reduces energy consumption, thereby contributing to GHG emission reductions.

Comparison of Photolithography and IJ Methods in SR Application to Printed Circuit Boards
Flowchart comparing the photolithography and inkjet methods of applying solder resist to printed circuit boards. Photolithography requires six steps, namely cleaning, full-surface coating, pre-drying, UV exposure, development and final drying, whereas the inkjet method needs only three, namely cleaning, inkjet printing and final drying. Applying ink only where it is needed shortens the process and reduces energy use.

Calculation Formula

Calculation Formula for Avoided GHG Emissions from the Inkjet System for Solder Resist Application
Diagram of the formula for calculating the avoided emissions of the inkjet system for applying solder resist. Annual avoided emissions in t-CO₂e are obtained by subtracting the GHG emissions from the process energy of the inkjet method from those of the photolithography method, and multiplying by the board area that one tonne of inkjet solder resist ink can coat and the annual sales volume of that ink.

Assumptions

  • Calculations are based on energy data collected from actual operations at multiple printed circuit board manufacturing plants.
  • The calculation scope is limited to the SR formation process and covers the difference in energy consumption in the production processes being replaced and in shared equipment within the production area. While GHG emissions associated with the procurement and disposal of input materials are not included in this calculation, no trade-offs were identified because the amounts of ink, solvents, developers, and photomasks used and disposed of are all lower with the IJ method than with the conventional method.

Timeframe

The calculation period is one year (FY2025). Avoided GHG emissions per ton of ink are calculated based on the average values obtained from assessments at multiple companies and then multiplied by sales volume.

Analysis Results

The figure below compares the energy load of the SR process under the conventional method and the IJ method. Verification at multiple plants confirmed that the energy load can be reduced by approximately 40%.

Comparison of SR Process Energy Load Before and After IJ Implementation
Stacked horizontal bar graph comparing the energy load of the solder resist process before and after introducing inkjet. Before introduction the load comprises air conditioning, final drying, exposure, development, pre-drying, coating and pretreatment; after introduction, steps such as exposure, development and pre-drying disappear and the total energy load shrinks. Verification at several plants confirmed a reduction of about 40%.

Calculation Basis

  • Calculations for the IJ method are based on the condition of applying SR ink to 21.6 m2 of circuit boards per hour.
  • Detailed process conditions vary among the plants where verification was conducted, but all of them manufacture rigid printed circuit boards using the photolithography method.
  • The reduction in energy consumption by shared equipment (e.g., HVAC) was calculated based on the area ratio of the zones dedicated to pre-baking, exposure, and development—processes that are shortened by adopting the IJ method.

Assessment Based on the WBCSD Guidance

  • In this calculation, Konica Minolta has confirmed that the three Eligibility Gates are satisfied.
    Gate 1: Konica Minolta's SBT net-zero target has been validated.
    Gate 2: This effect contributes to the "Energy Efficiency" mitigation measure identified in IPCC AR6.
    Gate 3: Based on the diagram above, GHG emissions are reduced mainly through energy savings achieved by shortening the process.
  • No trade-offs were identified because the amounts of ink, solvents, developers, and photomasks used and disposed of are all lower with the IJ method than with the conventional method.
  • Avoided GHG emissions from inkjet-based solder resist formation are not subject to third-party assurance.

Limitations

These calculation results are based on the above assumptions; actual GHG reduction effects will vary depending on operating conditions.

Inkjet Heads for Commercial Printing

Target Solution

Digital printing presses incorporating Konica Minolta inkjet heads

Comparison Target

Market-average analog printing presses

FY2025 Avoided Emissions

Annual avoided GHG emissions: 62 thousand t-CO2e/year*1

Annual contribution to natural resource usage reduction: 31 thousand tons/year*1

*1:Combined figures for inkjet products (inkjet systems for solder resist application and inkjet heads for commercial printing).

Overview

Digital printing technology enables on-demand production and contributes to GHG reductions by reducing the number of steps in the printing process. Konica Minolta's inkjet heads (IJ heads) feature high durability and application-specific customizability, helping digitize printing across a wide range of media.

Contribution of IJ Heads to Avoided Emissions in Digital Printing
Diagram showing the contribution of inkjet heads to the avoided emissions of digital printing, comparing offset printing with a digital printing system incorporating a Konica Minolta inkjet head. Offset printing requires data creation and plate making, including material production, in the prepress stage, and plate changing, setting and color adjustment, including paper production and test printing, in the printing stage, whereas the digital printing system goes straight from data creation to printing and needs no plate making, plate changing, setting or color adjustment. Eliminating unnecessary printing reduces CO₂ emissions from the printing process.

Calculation Formula

Calculation Formula for Avoided GHG Emissions from IJ Heads
Diagram of the formula for calculating the avoided emissions of inkjet heads. Annual avoided emissions in t-CO₂e are obtained by multiplying the GHG reduction achieved by digitalizing printing, as shown for the Accurio series, by the attribution rate of the inkjet head within the press and the number of devices equipped with the head in operation in the market.

Assumptions

  • Industrial printing presses are evaluated under the same printing conditions as those used for Konica Minolta's Accurio series digital printing systems.
  • To avoid double counting within the company, IJ heads incorporated into Konica Minolta's own digital printing presses are excluded from the calculation; calculations cover only IJ heads sold for integration into third-party digital printing presses.

Timeframe

The calculation period is one year (FY2025). Assuming that products sold in FY2022 and later operate over a four-year product lifespan, the total effect attributable to Konica Minolta's products is calculated by multiplying the effect per unit by the number of units operating in the market.

Analysis Results

The avoided GHG emissions from digital printing presses incorporating Konica Minolta IJ heads are shown in the table below.

Avoided GHG Emissions from IJ Heads in Digital Printing Presses*
ApplicationReduction EffectContribution of IJ Heads
Commercial Printing SystemsReduction in Printing Plates and Test Prints13%

*The avoided GHG emissions per printing press are calculated with reference to the calculation results for Konica Minolta's Accurio series and adjusted to reflect the specifications of the equipment in which the IJ heads are installed.

Calculation Basis

  • In this calculation, the contribution of IJ heads to the avoided GHG emissions of each printing press is applied as a "contribution ratio." This contribution ratio is determined based on the ratio of the market size on a per-head basis to the market size on a per-printing-press basis.
  • The number of IJ heads installed per digital printing press is based on a standard figure derived from past performance. The number of third-party machines equipped with Konica Minolta IJ heads and operating in the market is calculated by dividing the number of heads sold by the number of heads installed per unit for each application.

Assessment Based on the WBCSD Guidance

  • In this calculation, Konica Minolta has confirmed that the three Eligibility Gates are satisfied.
    Gate 1: Konica Minolta's SBT net-zero target has been validated.
    Gate 2: This effect contributes to the "Energy Efficiency" and "Material Efficiency" mitigation measures identified in IPCC AR6.
    Gate 3: Based on the diagram above, GHG emissions are reduced through reductions in process steps and materials achieved by replacing analog printing with digital printing.
  • In the Accurio series calculations, GHG emissions from raw material procurement, manufacturing, transportation, and disposal of the printing presses themselves were confirmed to be very small compared with GHG emissions from the printing process, and no trade-offs have been identified.
  • Avoided GHG emissions from IJ heads for commercial printing are not subject to third-party assurance.

Limitations

These calculation results are based on the above assumptions; actual GHG reduction effects will vary depending on operating conditions.

Anti-Reflection Film for OLED TVs

Target Solution

Konica Minolta anti-reflection film for OLED TVs

Comparison Target

Conventional anti-reflection film for OLED TVs

FY2025 Avoided Emissions

Annual avoided GHG emissions: 0.86 thousand t-CO2e/year

Annual contribution to natural resource usage reduction: 0.21 thousand tons/year

Overview

TV screens consist of multiple film layers that serve various functions. The use of Konica Minolta's anti-reflection film for OLED TVs eliminates the need for the protective film used with conventional anti-reflection films and discarded during the manufacturing process, thereby contributing to reductions in GHG emissions associated with the manufacture of the protective film.

Reduction in Protective Film Use with Konica Minolta Anti-Reflection Film
Diagram showing that adopting Konica Minolta's anti-reflection film removes the need for the protective film previously required in the process, cutting the GHG emissions from producing that film

Calculation Formula

Calculation Formula for Avoided GHG Emissions from Anti-Reflection Film for OLED TVs
Diagram of the formula for calculating the avoided emissions of anti-reflection film for OLED TVs. Annual avoided emissions in t-CO₂e are obtained by multiplying the GHG emissions from producing the protective film by the thickness and density of that film and the annual sales area of the anti-reflection film.

Assumptions

The calculation assumes that an area of protective film equivalent to the area of Konica Minolta anti-reflection film sold is eliminated and calculates the resulting reduction in GHG emissions from the raw materials and production of the protective film.

Timeframe

The calculation period is one year (FY2025).

Calculation Basis

  • The area of protective film eliminated is calculated based on the area of anti-reflection film sold by Konica Minolta.
  • PE is assumed to be the main raw material for the protective film. The thickness is based on Konica Minolta's research using actual market data.

Assessment Based on the WBCSD Guidance

  • In this calculation, Konica Minolta has confirmed that the three Eligibility Gates are satisfied.
    Gate 1: Konica Minolta's SBT net-zero target has been validated.
    Gate 2: This effect contributes to the "Material Efficiency" mitigation measure identified in IPCC AR6.
    Gate 3: Based on the diagram above, GHG emissions are reduced mainly by eliminating the need for protective film.
  • Avoided GHG emissions from anti-reflection film are not subject to third-party assurance.

Limitations

These calculation results are based on the above assumptions; actual GHG reduction effects will vary depending on operating conditions.