Cosmetics & Makeup

Material Composition Assumptions

The default bill of materials for a representative cosmetics unit (approximately 50 g net content plus packaging — equivalent to a mid-range lipstick or liquid foundation) includes:

• Net formulation (~30–55 g depending on format): Petroleum derivatives (mineral oil, petrolatum, waxes) ~20–40% by mass; emollients and emulsifiers (silicones, fatty alcohols) ~10–20%; pigments and effect materials (titanium dioxide, iron oxides, mica, carbon black) ~5–15%; water, preservatives, fragrance, and functional additives making up the remainder
• Primary packaging (~25–45 g): Glass jar or tube (~15–35 g for glass formats), or moulded HDPE/LDPE/acrylic container (~8–20 g for plastic formats); metal component (aluminium cap, collar, or mechanism) ~5–15 g; decorative elements (flocking, lacquering, hot-stamp foil) ~1–3 g
• Secondary packaging (~8–15 g): Folding paperboard carton, printed insert or leaflet, optional cellophane outer wrap
• Tertiary packaging (allocated per unit): Corrugated cardboard transit case shared across 6–24 units; approximately 5–8 g allocated per unit

The CCI score of 1.8 kgCO2e per unit reflects a blended estimate across product formats, anchored to a representative ~50 g unit. The per-kg figure of 36 kgCO2e/kg is notably high because cosmetics packaging is heavy relative to formulation volume — for many SKUs, the primary packaging exceeds the net content by mass — and because petroleum-derivative ingredients carry significant upstream extraction and refining emissions.

The score covers cradle-to-gate manufacturing emissions. Use-phase emissions (consumer behaviour such as applicator disposal, travel sizes) and end-of-life are excluded for consistency with the CCI methodology.

Manufacturing Geography

The default manufacturing region is mixed global, with primary production concentrated in the EU (particularly France, Italy, and Germany for prestige/mass-market tiers), China (dominant for contract manufacturing and packaging component supply), and the USA (large domestic brands and private-label production).

• EU grid intensity: ~300 gCO2e/kWh. EU cosmetics manufacturing facilities increasingly procure renewable electricity under PPAs; several L’Oréal and Coty facilities have achieved carbon neutrality at the operational level.
• China grid intensity: ~565 gCO2e/kWh. China is the dominant supplier of packaging components — glass jars, injection-moulded plastic, metal closures — and a major contract manufacturer for Asian market brands. Supply chains frequently involve multi-country assembly: packaging components from China, formulation in EU or USA.
• USA grid intensity: ~390 gCO2e/kWh. North American production is relevant for drugstore mass-market brands (Revlon, Maybelline, CoverGirl).

The default score uses a blended grid intensity of approximately 420 gCO2e/kWh for Scope 2 calculations. Scope 1 direct emissions (gas heating for batch melting/mixing, solvent recovery incineration) are relatively minor at 5% of the total.

Regional Variation

Region	Grid Intensity	Estimated Score Adjustment
EU average	~300 gCO2e/kWh	Baseline (default)
USA average	~390 gCO2e/kWh	+30% on Scope 2 (adds ~0.11 kgCO2e)
China	~565 gCO2e/kWh	+88% on Scope 2 (adds ~0.32 kgCO2e)
EU (renewable PPAs)	~30 gCO2e/kWh	-90% on Scope 2 (saves ~0.32 kgCO2e)
India	~700 gCO2e/kWh	+133% on Scope 2 (adds ~0.48 kgCO2e)

Note: Scope 2 represents approximately 20% of the total footprint. The dominant driver of variation is not grid intensity but rather packaging format choice (glass vs. plastic vs. metal) and the petroleum derivative intensity of the formulation. A glass-heavy premium product may score 2.5–3.5 kgCO2e per unit; a minimalist plastic-packaged product may score 0.8–1.2 kgCO2e per unit, independent of manufacturing location.

Provenance Override Guidance

A supplier or manufacturer may override the default CCI score by submitting:

1. Product Carbon Footprint (PCF) per ISO 14067 or a full cradle-to-gate LCA per ISO 14040/14044, covering the specific SKU and manufacturing facility. L’Oréal’s SPOT tool outputs qualify if the underlying methodology is disclosed.
2. Packaging material composition data including exact weights (g) of each component (glass, aluminium, LDPE, PP, paperboard) and verified recycled content percentages. Each 10% increase in glass cullet reduces the packaging contribution by approximately 2–3%.
3. Ingredient emission factors from Ecoinvent or GaBi for high-intensity inputs (titanium dioxide, petroleum wax, silicones, mica). Mica sourcing in particular can carry social and environmental premiums depending on mine of origin.
4. Factory energy mix documentation including renewable energy certificates (RECs) or on-site generation data.
5. Logistics mode data — cosmetics SKUs are frequently air-freighted due to high value-to-weight ratios; switching to sea freight can reduce logistics emissions by 80–90% for transoceanic routes.

The Quantis cosmetics LCA framework and L’Oréal PIL methodology are recognised as valid third-party frameworks for provenance override.

Methodology Notes

• CCI score of 1.8 kgCO2e per unit represents a mid-range estimate for a ~50 g cosmetics product. Published LCA data ranges from approximately 0.6 kgCO2e (minimalist plastic-packaged, water-based formulation) to 4.5 kgCO2e (heavy glass jar with metal components, high-pigment formulation). The per-kg figure of 36 kgCO2e/kg reflects the intensity of petroleum-derivative ingredients and multi-material packaging relative to net product weight.
• Scope breakdown: Scope 3 dominates at 75% (1.35 kgCO2e per unit), driven by upstream packaging production and chemical ingredient synthesis. Scope 2 (factory electricity for mixing, milling, filling) contributes 20% (0.36 kgCO2e). Scope 1 (direct combustion) is 5% (0.09 kgCO2e).
• Functional unit: One cosmetics unit of approximately 50 g (combined formulation and primary packaging), cradle-to-gate. Secondary and tertiary packaging are included on an allocated basis.
• High per-kg intensity: The 36 kgCO2e/kg figure is among the highest in the Personal Care domain. This reflects the combination of heavy multi-material packaging (glass, aluminium, plastic in a single SKU) relative to small net content, and formulation ingredients with high upstream extraction intensity (petroleum waxes, titanium dioxide via chloride process, synthetic mica).
• Mica and mineral pigments: Iron oxides, ultramarines, and mica (natural or synthetic) have relatively low carbon footprints per kg but carry significant social risk (artisanal mining). Synthetic mica has a higher carbon footprint than natural mica but eliminates child-labour supply chain risk — this trade-off is not captured in the CCI score.
• Confidence is medium because cosmetics SKUs span an enormous range of formats, formulations, and packaging weights. Published EPD data exists for packaging components but not routinely for finished cosmetics products. The Quantis study and L’Oréal carbon disclosure provide the best available category-level benchmarks.