The Product Carbon Footprint assessment carried out for KOPUR by SIQ Ljubljana demonstrates the measurable impact of using secondary materials. Four out of five analysed product groups achieve a carbon footprint of less than 1 kg CO₂e per kg of finished product, while scenario analyses show that using recycled instead of primary materials can reduce the carbon footprint by up to 83%.
4 out of 5
product groups with a carbon footprint below 1 kg CO₂e/kg
up to 83%
lower PCF through the use of recycled materials¹
0.42 kg CO₂e/kg
lowest result among the analysed product groups
From Circularity to Measurable Impact
In developing and manufacturing solutions for acoustic, thermal and fire-resistant insulation, KOPUR uses a range of secondary materials, including recycled PU foam, recycled rubber granulate and internal material residues that can be returned to the production process.
To quantify their impact, SIQ Ljubljana assessed the Product Carbon Footprint of five key KOPUR product groups:
What Does a Product Carbon Footprint Actually Mean?
Product Carbon Footprint (PCF) expresses the greenhouse gas emissions associated with a product during defined stages of its life cycle. Emissions from different greenhouse gases are converted into a common unit – CO₂e, or carbon dioxide equivalent.
For KOPUR, the assessment follows a cradle-to-gate approach. It covers the production or preparation of input materials, their transport and the manufacturing of the finished product:
A1 – raw materials → A2 – transport → A3 – production
Transport of the finished product to the customer, the use phase and end-of-life treatment are not included.
The results represent average values for the individual product groups for the reference year 2025 and are directly comparable only where system boundaries, functional units, methodology and data quality are comparable.
Results
Average carbon footprint per kg of finished product within each product group.
| Product group |
Carbon footprint kg CO₂e/kg |
| Products made from recycled PU foam |
0.74 |
| FonKo |
0.42 |
| KOPURsoft |
0.63 |
| Sound Supreme Board |
0.51 |
| Thermoformed PES non-woven products |
3.83 |
Location-based method, reference year 2025. The values represent the average carbon footprint of 1 kg of finished product within each product group.
What Happens if Recycled Material Is Replaced with Primary Material?
This question was examined through scenario analyses. For products containing recycled PU foam, a hypothetical carbon footprint was calculated assuming that primary PU foam was used instead of recycled PU foam, while transport conditions remained unchanged and the material was supplied by the same supplier in the same quantities. A similar scenario was assessed for KOPURsoft, using primary synthetic SBR rubber instead of recycled rubber granulate.
The results show that material choice can have a major impact on the final carbon footprint.
Products made from recycled PU foam
Data as a Basis for Further Improvement
The Product Carbon Footprint assessment provides a clearer understanding of where the greatest impacts occur across the product life cycle and which material and process decisions offer the greatest potential for improvement.
The results for 2025 support KOPUR’s development approach based on efficient resource use, the use of secondary raw materials and returning materials to the production cycle.
For KOPUR, these results provide a basis for further emissions reductions and the development of products with an even lower carbon footprint. For customers and partners, they provide access to transparent information on the environmental impact of products within the supply chain.
The assessment was carried out with reference to internationally recognised standards and methodologies, including ISO 14067, ISO 14044, the Greenhouse Gas Protocol – Product Life Cycle Accounting and Reporting Standard and PAS 2050.
SIQ Product Carbon Footprint Statement (PCF-2026-01128) →
More about KOPUR’s sustainability approach →
¹ Scenario analyses compare the use of selected secondary materials with hypothetical scenarios using primary materials, based on the assumptions defined in the SIQ study. The results are not intended as a direct comparison with products from other manufacturers.