Bring estate records, building configuration, intervention plans and model results into one connected workflow. Choose the analysis source that fits the question and the evidence available.
Keep multiple building records in a project, review available EPC and energy information, and compare the results supported by each building's current analysis.
Repeat for each building in the project.
Portfolio comparisons depend on the source, data coverage and model state for each building.
Estate screening helps teams decide where to spend their next analysis effort. It makes the available evidence and current plan easier to review together; it does not replace investigation of an individual building.
Project-level pathways can be compared using supported building results. Missing baselines or incompatible analysis outputs remain gaps to resolve, not values to infer.
Review geometry, configuration, source information and scenarios together. This helps an engineer check what a proposed change actually applies to.
Geometry and areas define what the model represents. Fabric and systems shape the starting condition; interventions change selected parts of that configuration over time.
Carbonfolio keeps evidence and assumptions alongside those inputs so reviewers can spot uncertain records, confirm coverage and understand why model outputs need further checking.
Choose a source based on the decision, supported building scope and available inputs—not as an automatic ladder of accuracy.
Early building-performance screening and intervention comparisons within the supported Office V1 domain.
Building-level scenario exploration using a simplified physical model.
Detailed engineering investigation with linked model geometry and saved design scenarios.
The sources are related by workflow, not by automatic conversion. Confirm the model, inputs and intended use for every result.
Schedule proposed changes in a building or estate plan, then compare the outputs available from the selected analysis source. Review energy, carbon, cost and peak electrical demand where supported.
A schematic sequence for explaining phased planning—not a recommendation, forecast or Carbonfolio simulation result. The appropriate measures and dates depend on project evidence and engineering review.
Scenario comparisons help make trade-offs visible. They do not optimise a project automatically or establish that a proposed package is feasible.
The project includes a Transition Risk analysis workspace for portfolio checks, building explanations and comparison between a selected plan and an explicit baseline.
Current non-domestic MEES screening is distinct from the Government's proposed 2031 direction. The workspace also supports user-defined rules and client targets; these are not regulations.
Findings can show applicability, missing inputs, evidence quality and the plan/scenario being assessed. Use them to investigate transition exposure and potential stranded-asset questions; Carbonfolio does not produce a standalone stranded-asset valuation.
Policy references: current MEES guidance · 2031 interim response.
Available reporting tools include a project assessment PDF, an estate project workbook, Studio Engineering Summary PDF/CSV, and Risk Analysis CSV.
Exports retain the selected project, scenario and result context. Check the result status and compatibility notes before sharing or using an export for a decision.
See the full workflowTechnical note. ROM Estimate is early-stage screening within its supported domain and is undergoing V1 implementation and validation. All analysis depends on source data, assumptions, model configuration and result status. Review technical findings for their intended use; regulatory checks do not replace legal or compliance advice.
Request a demonstration or discuss evaluation and licensing access.