Warehouse metrics
The same activity ledger,read for carbon instead of cost.
CO2 per order is the carbon attributable to fulfilling a single order, built from the same travel, MHE and energy activity the cost-to-serve model already uses — not a separate sustainability calculation run on the side. WareBee applies country-specific emissions rates to that activity per order, so the figure sits next to cost as one more read of data you already generate.
See the cost-to-serve visibility challenge
What it is
Priced in carbon, from the same events as the cost.
On WareBee's digital twin, CO2 per order is the carbon attributable to fulfilling a single order, built bottom-up from the same putaway, pick, pack and dock events — and the travel and MHE activity behind them — that the cost-to-serve model already logs. Each touch carries the emissions rate for the equipment and energy source that performed it, applied against a country-specific rate, so the figure for an order is a sum of real activity rather than a site-wide total divided across however many orders shipped that day.
The figure moves with the same things that move cost to serve, because it's read from the same events. Line count and how many locations a picker or a truck has to touch add travel and touches that add up; which MHE class handled a given movement matters, because an electric reach truck and a fuel-powered counterbalance carry different emissions rates for the same distance; and a route that zigzags instead of following the shortest path the navigation graph could find adds distance — and carbon — that a tighter route wouldn't have carried.
CO2 per order means little on its own until it's set beside operations that ask a genuinely similar amount of travel and handling of their fleet — and order profile, SKU count and footprint are what set that baseline, the same three factors cost to serve already reads against. WareBee runs that match before it compares a single figure, so your order's carbon reading sits beside orders that needed a comparable amount of activity to fulfil, not a total pulled from an operation built nothing alike.
What moves this number
The same activity that moves cost, read for carbon.
Each one is measured on your digital twin from data you already generate for cost to serve, so a carbon figure never needs a separate tracking project of its own.
Line count and locations touched
More lines and more locations mean more travel and handling events — the same activity that adds up to cost.
An order's line count and the number of locations a picker or a truck has to touch add travel and handling events the same way they add cost — each one carries its own emissions rate, not an average applied per order. A heavy, multi-location order costs more in carbon for the same reason it costs more to pick: there's genuinely more activity behind it.
Which MHE class made the move
An electric reach truck and a fuel-powered counterbalance don't carry the same emissions rate for the same distance.
Which class handled a given movement changes the figure independent of how far it travelled, because each class carries its own emissions rate for the energy it uses. The twin already knows which asset performed which task, so the rate applied is the one that actually applies, not a fleet-wide average.
How closely the route matches the shortest path
A route that zigzags instead of the shortest path the solver could find carries extra distance — and extra carbon.
Travel distance per line is measured off the same navigation graph that solves pick routes, comparing the path a list actually walked against the shortest path the solver could find through the same stops. A route that zigzags instead of following that shortest path adds distance a tighter route wouldn't have carried.
The same event ledger the cost model uses
Nothing about carbon is tracked separately — it rides on the events already logged for cost.
Every putaway, pick, pack and dock touch already logged for cost to serve carries an emissions rate alongside its price, rather than being tracked in a parallel system. That's what keeps the figure current without a separate sustainability project running on its own schedule.
One more column on the same cost breakdown.
CO2 per order isn't a separate dashboard — it's the same activity ledger that builds cost to serve, read for emissions instead of price. WareBee reads yours against a peer set matched on order profile, SKU count and footprint, then breaks the figure down by the same causes that move cost: line count and locations touched, which MHE class handled the work, and how closely the route matched the shortest path available.
A change tested for cost — a re-slot, a route change, a different MHE assignment — shows its carbon effect in the same simulation, on the same digital twin, before anything moves on the floor. This isn't a certified emissions disclosure or a substitute for a formal sustainability report; it's an operational reading built from the same events you already generate, useful alongside cost rather than instead of it.
- CO2 per order read against a peer set matched on order profile, SKU count and footprint
- Broken down by line count, MHE class and route efficiency — the same causes that move cost
- Changes tested on the twin show cost and carbon together, before anything moves
Questions
CO2 per order, read next to cost.
What exactly does CO2 per order measure?
It's the carbon attributable to fulfilling a single order, built from the same putaway, pick, pack and dock events — and the travel and MHE activity behind them — that the cost-to-serve model already logs. Each touch carries the emissions rate for the equipment and energy source that performed it, so the figure for an order is a sum of real activity rather than a site-wide total divided evenly across however many orders shipped that day.
How is CO2 per order actually calculated?
Every logged touch — a pick, a putaway, a dock movement, the travel behind each one — carries the emissions rate for the equipment and energy source that performed it, combined with a country-specific rate for the energy involved. Those figures sum to a total for the order the same way individual event costs sum to a cost-to-serve figure, using data the twin already captures rather than a separate carbon-accounting exercise.
Is this the same figure a sustainability report would use?
No, and it isn't meant to be. WareBee's CO2 per order is an operational reading built from the same activity ledger as cost to serve, not a certified emissions disclosure or a substitute for a formal sustainability report. If your organisation needs a figure for external reporting, this is evidence your sustainability team can use as an input, in the same way a finance team uses the cost-to-serve ledger as an input rather than a finished statement.
Why does CO2 per order move with the same things as cost to serve?
Because it's read from the same events. Line count and locations touched add travel and handling activity the same way they add cost; which MHE class handled a movement changes the emissions rate the same way it can change labour cost; and a route that matches the shortest path available carries less of both. The two figures move together because they're built from the same underlying activity, not two separate models that happen to agree.
Why not check CO2 per order against an industry average instead?
Because CO2 per order depends on order profile, SKU count and footprint before any efficiency question comes into it — how much travel and handling an order requires by nature sets a floor under the carbon figure, whatever the operation running it does well or badly. WareBee reads your number against operations matched on those three factors, the same peer set cost to serve uses, so a carbon figure is judged against orders shaped the way yours are, not a total that assumes every order looks alike.
What data does WareBee need to put a carbon figure on an order?
WareBee starts from the same activity data cost to serve already uses — putaway, pick, pack and dock events, whether they arrive through a WMS or ERP feed, a scan, or a CSV import — plus which equipment class performed each movement. No separate instrumenting project or new hardware is needed to get from a cost figure to a carbon one; it's a different read of data you're already generating.