Unleash Sustainability in Your Warehouse

How to Improve Sustainability and Efficiency at Logistics Sites

Logistics accounts for approximately 7% of global greenhouse gas emissions. For a long time, public debate focused almost exclusively on the transport sector, particularly on truck fleets, cargo ships, and air freight. However, another area is increasingly coming into focus: Around 20% of logistics-related emissions originate in warehousing, i.e., in storage and intralogistics.

Download here the PDF version of the whitepaper

Sustainability as an investment

The role of sustainability in the warehousing and logistics industry has changed significantly. While a few years ago it was primarily discussed as a driver of innovation and a strategic topic for the future, today the focus is increasingly shifting to operational efficiency and economic viability. The market now evaluates sustainability measures using the same criteria as other investments. As a result, decarbonization strategies often face a conflict of objectives between ecological ambition and economic rationality. In practice, a purely ecological motivation is rarely sufficient.

Structural conditions

Added to this are structural challenges. Numerous stakeholders, diverging interests, and increasing regulatory requirements make it clear that there can be no one-size-fits-all solution. New standards such as CSRD, CSDDD, and ESRS are increasing the pressure on companies to reliably document sustainability performance. At the same time, strategic influence often ends at the warehouse wall. Especially in 3PL structures, decision-making authority over building infrastructure often does not lie with the operational user. As a result, these locations are sometimes inadequately accounted for in company-wide emissions reporting, even though they play a central role in operations

Additionally, infrastructure decisions have long-term effects. Investments in building envelopes, energy technology, or warehouse automation often shape logistics sites for 15 to 30 years. Particularly in retrofits, the scope for action is significantly constrained by structural and architectural conditions. A portion of the emissions is thus effectively already “embedded.” At the same time, there are currently no uniformly defined standards for calculating the carbon footprint of warehouse buildings. This not only hinders comparability but also delays the transformation due to a lack of prioritization and control mechanisms.

Dimensions of environmental sustainability

Given this complexity, a key question arises for many companies:

How can the diverse requirements and influencing factors be translated into a feasible strategy for CO₂ reduction at their own logistics sites?

A first step is to systematically understand the relevant dimensions of sustainability. Fundamentally, the levers for decarbonizing a logistics site can be categorized into two areas: buildings and surroundings, and logistics and operations. A logistics center is not a static entity, but rather a complex system of energy, material, and process flows. The following overview highlights the key factors that can be used to systematically reduce a site’s environmental impact.

Figure 1: Dimensions of Environmental Sustainability at Logistics Sites

The basic energy and resource requirements of a logistics site are largely determined by its building structure and the design of its surroundings. These include, in particular, energy consumption for heating, cooling, lighting, and ventilation, as well as the building envelope and the construction materials used therein. Aspects such as water consumption, land use planning, or  the life-cycle assessment of buildings also influence the overall environmental footprint.

In the area of logistics and operations, actual energy and resource consumption arises from the operational processes within the warehouse. Key levers here include, for example, the electrification of industrial trucks, energy-efficient warehousing and material-handling technology, intelligent control of automated systems, and the management of packaging materials and consumables. In addition, circular economy approaches are becoming increasingly important, for example through recycling, the reuse of materials, or the cross-site utilization of resources.

To address these diverse levers in a structured manner, a clear procedural logic is recommended. At the core is a four-step approach:

Measure -> Reduce ->  Replace -> Offset

This serves as a structuring framework for the development of decarbonization strategies and simultaneously forms the central thread of the following analysis.

Based on this, key areas of action related to buildings, technical equipment, and operational activities are examined. The goal is to support companies in identifying relevant levers, prioritizing measures, and deriving a customized, measurable transformation strategy for their warehousing and logistics infrastructure.

The decarbonization strategy proposed here follows a consistent logic. It is based on a universally applicable structural principle that takes into account the complexity and individuality of warehouse locations. Regardless of industry, degree of automation, and location type, the sustainability formula can serve as the foundation for a robust decarbonization strategy. Whether a highly automated e-commerce fulfillment center is being planned from scratch or an existing distribution center on a brownfield site is being optimized: The underlying logic remains the same.

It follows a fixed hierarchy in which each step always takes priority over the subsequent ones:

1. Measure -> 2. Reduce -> 3. Replace -> 4. Offset.

This formula is intentionally kept simple. It offers a reliable and stable framework that can be applied with a high degree of customization to different logistics locations, organizational maturity levels, and operating conditions.

As a result, it helps structure your own decarbonization measures and set priorities. The focus shifts toward a systematic and transparent approach.

The individual steps are briefly outlined below:

1. Measure: This first step is as essential as it is critical: creating transparency regarding current energy consumption and the resulting emissions. Based on this, a baseline is defined that serves as the planning foundation for all further measures. The goal is to make a site’s processes and energy flows transparent enough to identify the relevant operational levers.

2. Reduce: The focus here is on increasing efficiency. This includes, in particular, energy efficiency, material flow efficiency, and space efficiency. Technical and process optimizations reduce baseline consumption even before the underlying energy source is taken into account.

3.  Replace: In this step, the actual transition to sustainable alternatives takes place. This includes, in particular, the use of renewable energy sources and the use of environmentally friendly materials.

4.  Offset: Even with the consistent implementation of all measures, emissions often remain that cannot currently be completely avoided for technical or economic reasons. These remaining emissions can be offset in the final step through certified offset measures.

Figure 2: Four-step decarbonization logic – from building emissions transparency to targeted offsetting

However, it is important to note that the sustainability formula is not a strictly sequential process that must be followed in its entirety from step one through four. In reality, decarbonization measures develop in parallel and iteratively. While transparency regarding energy flows is still being established in some areas, efficiency measures can already be implemented or sustainable technologies introduced elsewhere. What matters is not the strict sequence of individual measures, but the underlying logic of priorities—without hindering pragmatic improvements in day-to-day operations.

Every effective decarbonization strategy begins with the question:

Where is energy being consumed in our building today – and where are we unnecessarily losing efficiency?

 Without a reliable baseline, every measure remains speculative. Only when energy consumption and emissions are transparently quantified does the ability to manage them emerge. Anyone who electrifies, modernizes, or invests without knowing the actual drivers of consumption risks misallocation. That is why the structured assessment and analysis of the status quo is a prerequisite for well-informed decisions.

The goal of this phase is to create complete transparency regarding energy flows and emissions across the relevant processes. This involves not only absolute consumption figures but also the underlying relationships: Where do emissions originate? Which processes drive them? What costs are associated with them? Where do peak loads occur? Where are consumption and power requirements out of proportion?

Transparency is often fragmented, particularly in existing buildings or 3PL setups. Operators are responsible for the building infrastructure, while users manage the operational technology. Without a clear data foundation, it remains unclear who holds which levers and where responsibility begins or ends.

 An effective analysis in a warehouse typically takes place on three levels:

• Structured energy audit:
  A systematic and regular examination of emissions and energy consumption assesses the current state of the building, equipment, and operations. It identifies inefficient systems, unnecessary continuous consumption, oversized systems, and operating times without power demand.
  
  
• Granular consumption tracking (submetering):
  Overall consumption figures are not sufficient. Only the differentiated measurement of individual areas or systems (e.g., conveyor systems, cooling zones, charging infrastructure) enables a root-cause analysis. Submetering creates transparency at the process level.
  
  
• Continuous monitoring and target-based control:
  Consumption data accurate to the minute, combined with defined target values, turns energy into an actively managed variable. Deviations become immediately visible, and the effects of optimizations become measurable. In this way, energy efficiency becomes part of operational management – not just part of the sustainability report.

Only when we understand which processes are the largest emitters, whether it’s heating the warehouse or peak loads in the conveyor system, can we set targeted priorities.

Once transparency regarding energy flows and consumption drivers has been established, the most operationally effective step begins: targeted reduction.

Where do we start to significantly and sustainably reduce our site’s energy consumption without compromising performance?

Two key levers work in tandem here: On the one hand, it involves optimizing material flow and space utilization. At the same time, the energy efficiency of technical systems must be increased. 

Material flow as a driver of organizational efficiency

An inefficient material flow causes unnecessary travel, transfers, and wait times, as well as incorrectly sized conveyor lines and higher overall costs. This results in more transport, more operating hours, more personnel, more space, and higher energy consumption.

Targeted layout and process optimizations can

• intra-facility transport distances can be reduced,
• lead times shortened,
• space can be used more productively,
• improve equipment utilization, and
• enable growth within existing building structures.

Especially in brownfield environments, intelligent reorganization determines whether a site can be further developed or whether operations must be relocated to new buildings. Effective material flow optimization thus not only increases logistical performance but also reduces energy consumption per unit stored and moved. However, even the most effective structural optimization cannot replace systematic efficiency improvements in major technical energy consumers.

Energy efficiency as a technical leverl

Even with an optimal layout and perfectly designed material flow, reducing energy consumption remains a technical challenge. In practice, the greatest opportunities for improvement are concentrated in four dominant energy-consuming areas of a logistics site.

Lighting: Lighting is one of the most visible – and at the same time, one of the fastest to optimize – energy consumers in a warehouse. Modern LED technology, intelligent control systems, and consistent use of natural light can significantly reduce energy consumption while improving the quality of work.

Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC): 

In large-scale logistics facilities, building climate control accounts for a significant portion of total energy consumption. Measures here range from structural improvements to the building envelope, through differentiated temperature zoning to more efficient heating and ventilation systems.

Vehicles, warehousing, and material-handling technology: Internal transport processes represent another significant source of energy consumption. Electrified industrial trucks and energy-efficient automation solutions can significantly reduce energy consumption per movement and per order. The way technical systems are operated also has a major impact on energy consumption. Demand-based control of conveyor lines, intelligent driving strategies, or energy recovery in automated systems reduce unnecessary load peaks and energy losses.

Structured energy management: The primary lever lies in energy management itself. Only through systematic data collection, clear responsibilities, and defined energy metrics can efficiency measures be permanently measured and controlled.

To address these areas of action concretely, we have summarized the most important efficiency measures for logistics sites in a structured manner. In the appendix to this white paper, you will find a concise catalog of measures that highlights typical optimization potential in the areas of lighting, HVAC, vehicles, and warehouse technology, all the way through to energy management.

 The overview is intentionally designed as a practical checklist and can be used directly as a self-assessment for your own facility. It enables you to systematically verify which measures have already been implemented or planned, and where additional efficiency potential exists. Furthermore, it can also serve as a guide for defining technical requirements in requests for proposals or for evaluating external operators and service providers based on clear efficiency criteria.

This step in the sustainability formula comes into play when efficiency measures reach their limits and long-term climate goals need to be achieved. Conventional technologies and energy sources are replaced with more sustainable alternatives. For logistics sites, this applies in particular to the power supply, heating and cooling systems, as well as the propulsion concepts for intralogistics equipment and vehicles outside the building. Typical examples include the use of renewable energies, the electrification of industrial trucks, and the use of alternative heat sources.

This highlights the cumulative nature of the decarbonization strategy, as replacing existing systems can only be done effectively by taking the overall strategy into account. Only after energy demand has been reduced can the full benefits be realized. If this sequence is not followed, there is a risk of financing oversized systems or maintaining unnecessary capacity. The replacement is therefore not an isolated technological step, but a logical continuation of the measures previously implemented.

Green electricity as the cornerstone of climate-neutral logistics sites

Electricity from renewable energy sources is of fundamental importance for climate-neutral logistics sites. On-site electricity generation via photovoltaic systems on logistics rooftops is already the norm in new construction. Nevertheless, there are further opportunities to expand local electricity production. For example, facade-mounted or generally vertical modules increase utilization during seasons with low sun angles. Similarly, open spaces such as freight yards, parking lots, or adjacent green areas can be used for additional photovoltaic installations. For brownfield projects, or specifically for buildings with limited remaining structural capacity, there is the option of integrating ultra-lightweight modules onto the roof. 

To achieve the highest possible self-consumption of the generated electricity, battery storage systems are becoming increasingly important, and their price has also fallen significantly recently. They make it possible to store excess energy and use it at a later time, for example, to ensure the operation of equipment or electric vehicle charging infrastructure during the evening or night hours. At the same time, storage systems can help reduce peak loads in grid consumption and circumvent limited grid connection capacities.

In addition to local electricity generation via photovoltaics, other technologies can help meet a logistics site’s energy needs in a climate-neutral manner. An overview of key options for decarbonizing the energy supply – ranging from additional power sources to alternative heating and cooling systems and the electrification of technical equipment – is summarized in Figure 3.

In the area of heating, cooling, and ventilation, electric heat pumps in particular are considered a key technology for climate-neutral logistics sites. Depending on site conditions, they can be combined with geothermal energy, thereby enabling an efficient supply of heating and cooling. In addition, electrically powered surface or zone heating systems, such as underfloor heating or radiant ceiling panels, are used. Where available, the use of industrial waste heat from internal processes or neighboring facilities can also make a significant contribution to reducing energy demand.

Figure 3: Options for CO2-neutral energy consumption
 

The technology surrounding the logistics site also plays a role in decarbonization. While many intralogistics systems and conveyor technologies are already electrically powered today, there is often still potential – particularly in plant traffic and site-specific transport and operational processes – to switch from fuel-powered vehicles to electric alternatives.

A key prerequisite for this is the establishment of a high-performance charging infrastructure on-site. This not only enables the operation of electric yard vehicles but also forms an important foundation for the long-term electrification of the company’s own commercial vehicle fleet. The provision of charging infrastructure is therefore considered one of the key levers for the decarbonization of logistics transport processes. However, since this white paper focuses primarily on measures within warehouse and building operations, the topic of charging infrastructure is only touched upon here. It remains, nonetheless, a central building block for the holistic decarbonization of logistics networks.

Various forms of energy storage provide additional flexibility in the energy system. In addition to battery storage, thermal storage or storage in production media (such as compressed air or nitrogen) can also be used to shift energy over time and optimize load profiles.

Sustainable materials and resources

In addition to energy, material and resource consumption also plays a key role in the sustainability performance of a logistics site. Packaging materials are particularly relevant here, as they are increasingly coming into focus due to regulatory requirements (e.g., PPWR, extended producer responsibility), rising raw material costs, and ESG reporting obligations.

Packaging has an impact through direct material consumption, its influence on transport volume, handling effort, the degree of automation, and waste streams along the entire supply chain. Sustainable materials are therefore not merely a procurement or CSR issue, but also affect operational processes, space utilization, transport efficiency, and cost structures.

As with energy supply, a clear logic of priorities applies here: First, material usage should be reduced, for example through optimized packaging dimensions, thinner materials, or standardized load carriers. Only in a second step does the question of substitution with recyclable, bio-based, or reusable materials arise.

Reusable concepts, in particular, only realize their full potential when there are stable, closed-loop systems and sufficient circulation rates. For this reason as well, a holistic view of the life cycle, process compatibility, and return logistics is crucial within this complex of materials and resources.

An overview of typical measures for material reduction, material substitution, and the implementation of reusable systems can be found in the appendix to this white paper.

As an interim conclusion for this white paper, it can be stated that the “replace” step transforms an efficient site into a “greener” one. However, this step is only successful if it builds on previously implemented efficiency measures and is embedded in an overarching energy and site strategy.

In practice, a combination of local energy generation and intelligent management usually proves to be the most effective approach. Only when all technical and economic possibilities for replacement have been exhausted does the final step of the sustainability formula, offsetting unavoidable residual emissions, come into play.

Even with the consistent implementation of efficiency measures and technological transitions, not all emissions can be completely avoided in practice. Even very ambitious decarbonization strategies eventually reach technical, economic, or infrastructural limits. In such cases, residual emissions remain that cannot be further reduced in the short term. This is precisely where the final step of the sustainability formula comes into play: offsetting unavoidable emissions. 

It is important to emphasize that while these offset measures play a role in a comprehensive decarbonization strategy, they should never form its core. Their function is not to mask structural shortcomings in energy efficiency or in the technological approach. Nevertheless, it is clear that, depending on the energy balance at each individual location, residual emissions must be offset through certified nature conservation projects elsewhere in order to achieve the stated “net-zero” goal. 

It is precisely for these reasons that the much-discussed sequence of steps in the formula is so crucial: Offsetting serves as the final step in a consistently implemented decarbonization strategy. It ensures a completely clean energy balance, while the actual transformation of the site is achieved through efficiency improvements and the use of sustainable technologies.

Since we are convinced that sustainable substance at a site can only be achieved through genuine changes – to the building envelope and in logistics processes – this white paper deliberately focuses on the first three phases.

As neutral experts in logistics and intralogistics, our core competence lies in the strategic and technical optimization of your site. The market for carbon offsets, on the other hand, is a separate area of expertise. However, we support you in creating the necessary transparency so that you can precisely quantify your offset requirements.

The path to a climate-neutral logistics site is a key strategic decision. In an industry where investment decisions for buildings and facilities have a lifespan of 10 to 30 years, decarbonization today is synonymous with risk management and securing the future.

The measures presented in this white paper highlight the enormous potential for greater sustainability in intralogistics. However, a mere list of possibilities does not constitute a strategy. The path to a climate-neutral site is not a standard product, but a tailored response to the specific conditions of a site.

Progress is not achieved through the isolated use of individual technologies, but through their intelligent coordination. Each measure must be evaluated in the context of the site, for example with regard to brownfield or greenfield structures, grid connection capacities, or operating models. Clear prioritization and integration into a robust roadmap that combines short-term quick wins with long-term infrastructural transformation are crucial.

At the same time, regulatory pressure is continuously increasing due to requirements such as the CSRD or ESRS. 

However, companies that act early can turn compliance requirements into a competitive advantage.

A prerequisite for this is a solid data foundation: Only those who understand their current status can strategically chart a path to climate neutrality.

2. Reduce

The following catalog of measures highlights typical levers for reducing energy consumption at logistics sites. The measures are based on frequently identified efficiency potentials in warehouse projects and can serve as a guide for site analyses or internal improvement programs.

Lighting

Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC)

Vehicles, warehousing, and material handling

Industrial trucks

Warehouse technology

Conveyor Technology

The overarching lever: Energy management

Technology alone is not enough. Structured energy management serves as the framework for all reduction measures. It creates transparency, helps set priorities, and enables measurable progress. To achieve this, it is important to develop a clear strategy.

3. Replace

Material reduction

Material substitution

Reusable and circular systems

System-wide optimizations

If you’d like to systematically unlock efficiency potential in your warehouse, please feel free to contact us. We’ll support you with both the concept and implementation – for measurable productivity gains and sustainable cost savings