Featured Illustrative Projects
The examples below are representative scenarios designed to demonstrate the types of reviews, assessments and support services TrailZero can provide to SMEs. They do not represent actual client engagements. Figures are illustrative and based on conservative assumptions. Actual outcomes will vary depending on business size, operations and implementation of recommendations.
Packaging Efficiency Review for an Online Retailer
Challenge
An e-commerce business was using three standard shipping box sizes across approximately 25,000 annual orders. Management suspected packaging materials and courier costs could be reduced but had not quantified the opportunity.
Approach
Product dimensions, packaging specifications and shipment data were reviewed using photogrammetry-based measurements and packaging utilization analysis. Packaging consumption, void fill usage and courier charging structures were assessed remotely using data supplied by the client.
Findings
Approximately 30–40% of sampled orders were being shipped in boxes larger than required, resulting in excess cardboard consumption and avoidable void fill usage.
The review also identified opportunities to reduce dimensional shipping volume on a proportion of orders, potentially reducing transportation costs where volumetric charging structures applied.
Key Metrics
Metric: Value:
Annual Orders 25,000
Current Average Box Cost €0.60
Alternative Average Box Cost €0.52
Annual Void Fill Spend €3,500
Orders Sampled 1,000
Basis of Estimate
Assumes:
30–40% of orders suitable for alternative box sizing.
15–25% reduction in void fill usage.
2–4% reduction in volumetric courier costs.
Midpoint values applied.
Recommendations
Introduce additional box sizes aligned to product dimensions.
Review void fill requirements.
Update packaging selection procedures.
Monitor packaging utilization and dimensional shipping performance.
Potential Outcome
Area: Range: Midpoint:
Used Packaging Material Saving €1,500–€2,500 €2,000
Void Fill Saving €525–€875 €700
Courier Saving €500–€1,500 €1,000
Total Annual Saving €2,252–€4,875 €3,700
Challenge
A food business sourcing packaging from multiple suppliers wanted greater confidence that packaging documentation was complete, current and readily retrievable in advance of emerging packaging compliance requirements.
Approach
Packaging specifications, supplier declarations, food-contact documentation and packaging records were reviewed remotely. Documentation traceability and accessibility were assessed across the packaging portfolio.
Findings
Documentation was dispersed across emails, supplier portals and local records. Several declarations referenced older legislation and some packaging records required updating or clarification.
Key Metrics
Metric: Value:
Packaging SKUs Reviewed 15
Suppliers Reviewed 5
Documents Reviewed 32
Missing/Outdated Documents Identified 7
Basis of Estimate
Assumes:
4–6 supplier documentation requests annually.
2–4 customer compliance requests annually.
2–3 hours spent gathering documentation per request before implementation.
30–60 minutes after implementation.
Midpoint values applied.
Recommendations
Establish a central packaging compliance register.
Request updated declarations where required.
Introduce periodic documentation reviews.
Maintain supplier traceability records.
Potential Outcome
Area: Range: Midpoint Used:
Administrative Time Saving 15–30 Hours/Year 22.5 Hours/Year
Documentation Visibility Improved —
Supplier Response Readiness Improved —
Compliance Confidence Improved —
Packaging Compliance & Documentation Review for a Food Business
Sustainability Questionnaire Support for an SME Supplier
Challenge
A producer supplying larger retail chain organizations was increasingly receiving sustainability questionnaires covering emissions, energy, packaging, waste and environmental management practices.
Approach
Existing sustainability-related information was reviewed and consolidated into a structured baseline ESG data pack aligned with common customer requests and questionnaire formats.
Findings
Most requested information already existed within the business but was dispersed across invoices, utility records, spreadsheets and policy documents.
Key Metrics
Metric: Value:
Questionnaires Received Per Year 3–6
Data Sources Consolidated 8
Sustainability Metrics Identified 20+
Basis of Estimate
Assumes:
3–6 customer questionnaires annually.
4–8 hours effort per questionnaire before implementation.
1–3 hours after implementation.
Midpoint values applied.
Recommendations
Establish a central sustainability information repository.
Create standard responses for recurring requests.
Maintain annual sustainability data updates.
Potential Outcome
Area: Range: Midpoint Used:
Administrative Time Saving 20–40 Hours/Year 30 Hours/Year
Questionnaire Completion Time Reduced —
Response Consistency Improved —
Customer Readiness Improved —
Carbon & Fleet Efficiency Review for a Distribution Business
Challenge
A regional distribution business wanted to better understand the relationship between fuel consumption, operating costs and greenhouse gas emissions across its vehicle fleet.
While fuel costs were known, management had limited visibility of which vehicles and activities were driving overall fuel consumption and emissions
Approach
Twelve months of fuel purchase records, mileage data and fleet information were reviewed to establish an activity-based carbon baseline using actual operational data rather than expenditure-based estimates.
Findings
The analysis identified notable variation in fuel efficiency between vehicles undertaking comparable activities.
The review also highlighted trends in fuel consumption over time, enabling management to better understand the factors contributing to overall fleet costs and emissions.
By linking emissions calculations directly to operational data, the business gained greater visibility of where fuel was being consumed and where opportunities for improvement may exist.
Key Metrics
Metric: Value:
Annual Diesel Consumption 50,000 Litres
Average Diesel Cost €1.75/Litre
Annual Fuel Spend €87,500
Vehicles Reviewed 15
Basis of Estimate
Assumes:
Improved vehicle utilization.
Route optimization opportunities.
Review of fuel efficiency trends.
Monitoring and management of fleet performance
Estimated fuel reduction range:
3–7%.
Midpoint value:
5%.
Emissions estimates based on actual fuel consumption records and recognized EPA, SEAI and greenhouse gas conversion methodologies.
Where fuel composition data is available, calculations may incorporate renewable fuel content to provide a more representative emissions baseline.
Recommendations
Establish regular monitoring of fuel efficiency metrics.
Review vehicle performance trends.
Identify opportunities to improve fleet utilization.
Evaluate suitability of lower-emission fuel alternatives where appropriate.
Introduce periodic carbon and fuel performance reporting.
Potential Outcome
Area: Range: Midpoint Used:
Fuel Reduction 1,500–3,500 Litres 2,500 Litres
Fuel Cost Saving €2,675–€6,125 €4,375
Emissions Reduction 4.0–9.4 tCO₂e 6.7 tCO₂e
Energy & Carbon Review for a Food Retail Business
Challenge
A food retail business wanted to better understand its energy consumption profile and identify opportunities to reduce operating costs.
While annual electricity and gas expenditure was known, management had limited visibility of energy consumption trends and their relationship to business operations.
Approach
Twelve months of electricity and gas consumption data were analyzed alongside operating hours and available utility information to establish an activity-based energy and emissions baseline.
Findings
The review identified periods of elevated energy consumption relative to business activity and seasonal demand.
Analysis of energy usage trends highlighted opportunities for further investigation and optimisation, particularly where consumption remained relatively consistent despite fluctuations in operational activity.
The assessment provided a clearer understanding of how energy consumption contributed to both operating costs and greenhouse gas emissions.
Key Metrics
Metric: Value:
Annual Electricity Spend €28,000
Annual Gas Spend €7,000
Total Energy Spend €35,000
Utility Bills Reviewed 24
Basis of Estimate
Assumes:
Enhanced visibility of consumption patterns,
Energy performance monitoring,
Review of operating schedules,
Identification of abnormal consumption trends
Estimated energy reduction range:
4–8%.
Midpoint value:
6%.
Emissions estimates are based on actual energy consumption data and recognized emissions factors from EPA, SEAI and government greenhouse gas conversion factor methodologies.
Where interval meter data is available, additional analysis may be performed to improve understanding of energy consumption patterns.
Recommendations
Establish regular monitoring of energy performance.
Review energy consumption trends against business activity.
Investigate periods of elevated consumption.
Develop an annual energy and emissions baseline.
Identify future efficiency opportunities as data becomes available
Potential Outcome
Area: Range: Midpoint Used:
Energy Reduction 4–8% 6%
Annual Cost Saving €1,400–€2,800 €2,100
Emissions Reduction 2.3–4.8 tCO₂e 3.5 tCO₂e
Sustainability (VSME) Readiness Assessment for an SME
Challenge
An SME wished to prepare for increasing customer, lender and supply-chain requests for sustainability-related information but had not previously completed structured ESG or sustainability reporting.
Approach
Existing operational, environmental, social, and governance information was reviewed against the Voluntary Sustainability Reporting Standard for SMEs (VSME). Available data sources were assessed and reporting gaps identified.
Findings
Much of the information required for VSME reporting already existed within the business but was dispersed across multiple systems, records and departments.
Several opportunities were identified to improve consistency, ownership and accessibility of sustainability-related data.
Key Metrics
Metric: Value:
Data Sources Reviewed 10+
ESG Topics Assessed 20+
Reporting Framework VSME
Basis of Estimate
Assumes:
Initial collection of environmental, social and governance information.
Consolidation of data from multiple business functions.
Creation of a structured reporting baseline.
Estimated administrative effort reduction:
20–50 hours annually.
Midpoint value:
35 hours.
Recommendations
Establish a central sustainability data repository.
Assign ownership for key sustainability metrics.
Develop an annual reporting process.
Identify priority areas for future improvement.
Potential Outcome
Area: Range: Midpoint Used:
Administrative Time Saving 25–60 Hours/Year 42.5 Hours/Year
Reporting Readiness Improved —
Customer & Lender Readiness Improved —
Sustainability Data Visibility Improved —