Synlait releases Integrated Climate Report
Synlait Milk Limited · 1028 Heslerton Road, RD13 Rakaia, Canterbury, New Zealand · +643 373 3000 · www.synlait.com
NZX: SML
ASX: SM1
28 November 2025
Synlait releases Integrated Climate Report
Synlait Milk Limited (Synlait) advises that it has released its second Integrated Climate Report, incorporating
the company’s sustainability report, climate-related disclosure, and greenhouse gas inventory for the
financial year ended 31 July 2025 (FY25).
Synlait CEO Richard Wyeth commented: “The report highlights the progress that is being made on-farm and
credit must be given to our farmers for their efforts in this area – they are making a difference. We will retain
our focus in this area as it helps Synlait retain, grow and attract global customers.”
Synlait Chair George Adams added: “While the business itself made slower progress, the fact we took some
steps towards our ambition of being ‘net positive for the planet’ while fighting for Synlait’s survival reflects
the fact sustainability is embedded in the way our people do business. We are proud of that.”
Key metrics include:
• A 6% decrease in Scope 1 and 2 emissions compared with Synlait’s base year (FY20). These
increased 7% on FY24 due to energy sources, including the use of coal and a change to the
emission factor applied to electricity.
• A 13% decrease in on-farm greenhouse gas emissions per tonne of milk solids compared to FY20.
These decreased 6% on FY24.
• A 38% decrease in modelled nitrogen loss off Synlait suppliers’ farms since the FY18 base year, with
a year-on-year reduction of 8%.
• The total number of native seedlings distributed to farms and community projects under the
processor’s Whakapuāwai programme reaching 327,589 (with 80,000 distributed during FY25).
For more information contact:
Jo Scott
Corporate Affairs Manager
P: +64 021 883 123
E: jo.scott@synlait.com
---
Integrated Climate
Report 2025
Foreword
This is the second integrated Climate Report from Synlait Milk Limited
(Synlait). It incorporates Synlait’s mandated climate-related disclosure,
sustainability report and greenhouse gas inventory for the 2025 financial year
(FY25) which ran from 1 August 2024 to 31 July 2025.
This report covers all Synlait subsidiaries including Dairyworks Limited and Synlait Milk Dunsandel
Farms Limited, both wholly-owned subsidiaries of Synlait. It excludes companies or investments that Synlait
does not hold a majority ownership stake in, unless otherwise stated.
Aspects of this report have been produced to align with the Aotearoa New Zealand Climate Standards
(NZ CS 1, NZ CS 2 and NZ CS 3). A climate-related disclosure (CRD) index has been provided in the
appendices. In alignment with External Reporting Board (XRB) staff guidance, we have included a summary
of our updated scenario analysis within this report. A scenario is a believable but hypothetical sequence of
events leading to a plausible future outcome.
It is important to note that climate scenarios are not forecasts and do not necessarily represent
management’s performance expectations for Synlait. The scenarios cannot and should not be relied upon
as fact and may be subject to change due to circumstances unforeseen at the time of analysis. Our climate
scenario analysis provides insights into possible future pathways. We have leveraged these scenarios to
test our business model and strategy, to better understand potential climate-related risks and opportunities
that may transpire for Synlait. Any risks or opportunities outlined in this document are intended for guidance
purposes and should not be interpreted as predictive forecasts.
KPMG has provided limited assurance (Scope 1, 2 and 3) over our greenhouse gas data (GHG). The
assurance opinion can be found from page 44. However, this applies only to the GHG Inventory Report
(pages 33 to 43) and the greenhouse gas data contained in the metrics and targets section (page 32).
Reporting Suite
Synlait has taken a proactive approach to sustainability reporting since we published our first sustainability
report in 2019. We have published these sustainability-related reports on an annual basis, knowing our
stakeholders value such information. In early 2025, the company’s first annual Modern Slavery Statement
was published separately. A copy of this report and all previous reports in our reporting suite are available
at: synlait.com/investors/
Synlait’s Whakapuāwai programme has seen nearly 330,000 native
seedlings planted across Canterbury farms and community projects.
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025PAGE 02
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
Chair and CEO Welcome 04
Sustainability Metrics 05
1. Sustainability Report 06
Our Sustainability Strategy 07
Our Commitments 08
Pillar 1: Climate 09
Pillar 2: Nature 11
Pillar 3: Wellbeing 13
2. Climated-Related Disclosures 15
Section One: Governance 16
Section Two: Strategy 20
Section Three: Risk Assessment 27
Section Four: Metrics and Targets 29
3. GHG Emissions Inventory 33
Appendices 47
Appendix One: Key Sustainability Metrics 48
Appendix Two: Climate-Related Disclosure Index 49
Appendix Three: Climate-Related Disclosure Adoption Provisions 49
Appendix Four: Scenario Narratives 50
Appendix Five: Glossary 52
Statement of Compliance
Synlait’s climate-related disclosure (CRD)
complies with the Aotearoa New Zealand
Climate Standards (NZ CS) issued by
the External Reporting Board (XRB).
Information about the adoption provisions
Synlait has elected to use is located in the
appendices.
Our sustainability approach
is underpinned by:
We are committed to:
Contents
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025PAGE 03
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
It is our pleasure to present
Synlait’s second Integrated
Climate Report for the
financial year ended 31 July
2025 (FY25).
This was not an easy 12 months for
Synlait. People at all levels of the
business pulled together to ensure
the company overcame a number of
major challenges – including solvency,
manufacturing disruptions and the
potential loss of the majority of our milk
supply.
The fact there was never a shortage
of people, both in the business and
within our wider support base, willing
to put their shoulder to the wheel
and work some long hours to get the
company through, speaks to the strong
engagement people have with Synlait
and what it stands for.
Synlait was set up to be different –
to disrupt the status quo by offering
Canterbury farmers choice, enabling
them to earn more for their milk while
supporting them to uplift their on-farm
performance.
A proud history of pioneering
sustainability is part of that
difference.
Synlait established Australasia’s first
internationally accredited dairy farm
assurance system, Lead With Pride™,
more than a decade ago. The programme
remains market-leading.
Farmers are independently audited
before being certified and the
programme’s rigorous standards
go beyond New Zealand’s legal
requirements for dairy farming.
The fact 81% of Synlait farmers have
chosen to do the work required to
become Lead With Pride™ certified
reflects the fact they are forward thinkers
who go above and beyond for their
animals, their communities and their
environment.
Our farmers are making
real progress.
FY25 saw Synlait farmers further lower
their farms' modelled nitrogen loss to
waterways. It is now 38% lower than our
baseline year of FY18 with a year-on-year
reduction of 8%.
This ongoing progress is the result of a
collective effort across Canterbury that
we can all be proud of.
Alongside that, Synlait farmers’ on-farm
greenhouse gas emissions are dropping
with a 13% decrease (per tonne of milk
solids) reported this year compared to
our FY20 baseline.
FY25 saw us deepen our
understanding of the climate
risks facing our business.
This included quantitative analysis
to better understand how potential
climate variables, such as an increase
in hot days, might affect our sites and
our suppliers under different scenarios
and time horizons. This will help inform
action towards increased resilience to
climate change.
This report contains a number of key
metrics, including:
• A 6% decrease in Scope 1 and 2
emissions compared with Synlait’s
base year (FY20). These increased
7% on FY24 due to energy
sources, including the use of coal
and a change to the emission
factor applied to electricity.
• Another 80,000 native seedlings
planted across Canterbury as part
of our Whakapuāwai programme.
• A successful pilot of new plant-
based pellets to fire our boilers.
• A new agreement to power our
South Island operations with 100%
renewable solar energy.
• The completion of our first Modern
Slavery Statement.
The fact we have taken some steps
towards our ambition to be ‘net positive
for the planet’ while we were fighting
Synlait’s survival is something we are
proud of.
It reflects both an ongoing
commitment from leadership and the
fact that sustainability is embedded in
Synlait’s DNA and a natural part of the
way our people do business.
It is a mindset that will ensure Synlait
keeps progressing towards the targets
and KPIs laid out in our Sustainability
Strategy because they’re valued – by
our global customers, our farmers and
our people.
Regards,
George Adams Richard Wyeth
Chair CEO
Richard Wyeth, CEO
George Adams, Chair
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025PAGE 04
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
Chair and CEO Welcome
¹ Scope 1 and 2 emissions are up by 7% on FY24. This was driven by Synlait’s energy sources, including the use of coal, and changes to the emission factor applied to electricity.
² A 4% increase on FY24.
³ A 0.3% decrease on FY24.
⁴ A 5% increase on FY24.
⁵ A 3% increase on FY24.
FY25 was a challenging year for Synlait's
financial performance. The metrics on this
page show we made some progress towards
our sustainability goals despite that.
Sustainability Metrics
Scope 1 and 2 emissions compared
with our FY20 base year¹
6%
On-farm GHG emissions per tonne
of milk solids compared to FY20
13%
Native plants distributed under Synlait’s
Whakapuāwai programme since 2019
327,589
Synlait packaging reusable,
recyclable or compostable³
99.4%
Dairyworks packaging reusable,
recyclable or compostable⁴
85%
Non-hazardous waste recycled⁵
85%
Farmers Lead With Pride™ certified²
81%
Modelled nitrogen loss on-farm
compared to FY18
38%
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025PAGE 05
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
Sustainability
Report
CHAPTER ONE
SUSTAINABILITY REPORT
PAGE 06
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
FY24 saw Synlait update
its strategy to ensure the
company was still focused on
the right goals to reach our
ambition to be net positive for
the planet.
Our new strategy contains 35 key
commitments under three pillars –
Climate, Nature and Wellbeing. You can
see these on the following page.
What didn’t change were our key
commitments, which have a target date
of FY28.
A B Corp™ is a for profit company that has independently verified
by the nonprofit B Lab to meet rigorous standards of social
and environmental performance, accountability, and public
transparency. Synlait achieved B Corp certification in June 2020
(the first NZ-based dairy processor to do so) and was recertified
in 2023, reflecting our commitment to doing milk differently
balancing people, planet, and profit.
Progress towards our targets is broken down by focus area:
Mitigation and Adaptation
Climate change is one of the biggest issues
facing the planet. Synlait has set science-based
targets to cut business and on-farm emissions
and is working to ensure supply chain resilience.
Page 09
People and Animal
The wellbeing of people and animals is
important to our business. Synlait takes a
leadership approach to caring for both across
our value chain.
Page 13
Biodiversity and Soil Health,
Water and Waste/Circular Economy
As a business closely connected to New
Zealand’s whenua (land), Synlait is committed
to improving biodiversity, soil health, and water
while embracing the circular economy.
Page 11
PILLAR 1
Climate
PILLAR 3
Wellbeing
PILLAR 2
Nature
Our Sustainability Strategy
¹ From a baseline year of FY20.
² From a baseline year of FY18 in Dunsandel.
Our sustainability strategy is supported by several internal and external programmes:
Lead With Pride™ is Synlait’s flagship farmer certification
programme. It guides farmers to best practice across four pillars:
Environment, Animal Health and Welfare, Milk Quality and Social
Responsibility and rewards them with incentives above the base
milk price once they pass an independent audit to become
certified. In FY25 81% of our farmers were certified.
A Science Based Target (SBT) is a greenhouse gas emissions
reduction goal aligned with climate science to keep global
warming within 1.5°C, verified by the Science Based Targets
initiative (SBTi). Updates on our progress to our science-based
targets is on page 36.
AgriZero
NZ
was launched in early 2023 as a world-first public-
private partnership between the New Zealand government
and six major agribusiness companies, including Synlait. This
partnership demonstrates how public and private sectors can
come together to tackle a major national challenge, reducing
agricultural greenhouse gas emissions. Synlait has committed
to investing a total of $3.5 million in this partnership as we
recognise the need for industry wide action.
They are:
30%
45%
20%
20%
99%
Intensity reduction
in on-farm emissions¹
Absolute reduction in
Scope 1 and 2 emissions¹
Reduction in water use
per tonne of product²
Reduction of nitrogen
discharge per tonne
of product²
Total non-hazardous
manufacturing waste
diverted from landfill
PAGE 07
SUSTAINABILITY REPORT
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
ClimateWellbeingNature
Mitigation
On-Farm
Operations
Supply Chain
AdaptationBiodiversity and Soil HealthWaterWaste/Circular EconomyPeopleAnimal
• 30% reduction in GHG On-
Farm per kgMS by FY28
from a FY20 base year.
• Establish a Science-
based Targets initiative
(SBTi) Forestry, Land and
Agriculture (FLAG) target
for on-farm emissions.
• 100% of Lead With
Pride
TM
farms to have
a farm resilience plan
incorporating climate
adaptation.
• Estsblish a science-based
target for biodiversity and
soil health with agreed
roadmap and action
strategy.
• 100% of Lead With
Pride
TM
farms have a
farm resilience plan
incorporating biodiversity
and soil health.
• Broadening Whakapuāwai
into an ecological centre
of excellence, that is
significantly contributing
to restoring biodiversity
and contributing to cutting
edge ecological projects.
• Nature targets and
accounting are managed
across the Synlait business.
• 20% reduction in water
use per tonne of product
by FY28, from a FY18 base
year for our Dunsandel site.
• 20% reduction of nitrogen
discharge per tonne of
product by FY28 from a
FY18 base year for our
Dunsandel site.
• 99% of total non-hazardous
manufacturing waste will
be diverted from landfill by
2028.
• 100% of product packaging
will be reusable, recyclable,
or compostable.
• At least 50% recycled
content in all packaging.
• Total Recordable Injury
Frequency Rate below five.
• Positive net wellbeing score
accross business.
• 40% to 50% women
as managers or senior
specialists (remuneration
grade 16 and above.)
• Gender pay gap <8% by FY26.
• Establish a Modern Slavery
Policy and Management Plan.
• 100% high value/high risk
contracts with wellbeing
criteria.
• 100% high value/high
risk contracts with animal
wellbeing criteria.
• 100% high value/high risk
contracts with GHG criteria.
• Business continuity and
resilience assessments
complete across key
markets.
• 100% high value/high risk
contracts with biodiversity
and soil health criteria.
• 100% high value/high
risk contracts with water
criteria.
• 100% high value/high risk
contracts with waste and
circular economy criteria.
• Animal Health and Welfare
Plan in action across all
Synlait farms.
• Climate adaptation
integrated into 10
Year Asset Plan and
management decision
making.
• 45% absolute reduction in
Scope 1 and 2 emissions
by FY28 from a FY20 base
year.
• Quantity: Demonstrating an
improvement in water use
efficiency across our entire
supply base.
• Quality: 100% of farms
taking action to achieve
catchment-specific water
quality objectives.
• 45% reduction in nitrogen
loss to waterways per
kilogram of milk solids by
2028 from a FY18 base year.
• Establish a science-based
approach to on-farm water.
• 100% of Lead With
Pride
TM
farms have a
farm resilience plan
incorporating waste
reduction initiatives.
• Execute Social
Responsibility Strategy 2.0
across 100% of Lead With
Pride
TM
farms.
• Top quartile supplier Net
Promoter Score.
• 100% of Lead With Pride
TM
farms have an Animal
Health and Welfare Plan in
action.
We have 35 commitments and KPIs in our Sustainability Strategy. These are focused on the three key areas where Synlait can make an impact – Climate, Nature and Wellbeing.
They include our science-based targets on greenhouse gas emissions.
Our Commitments
PAGE 08
SUSTAINABILITY REPORT
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
• GHG on-farm
Utilising Lead With Pride™ and our
customised greenhouse gas tool
to support and incentivise our
farmers to reduce GHG on-farm.
This includes significant financial
incentives recognising both good
performance and improvement.
We are also working closely with
farmer suppliers to implement
new technologies and change our
farming systems to reduce GHG
on-farm.
• Reduction in coal use
Investing in our assets to allow
us to remove coal as a fuel in our
processes by 2030 and reduce our
Scope 1 and 2 GHG Emissions by
45% by 2028.
• Climate adaptation
Climate science tells us that the
effects of climate change will
produce more extreme weather
events. Our focus is on building
resilience across our business
and our farmer suppliers. We are
integrating climate adaptation
strategies across the business
to offset the potential impacts.
• Sustainable procurement
Our climate change responsibility
extends through our value chain.
We are focused on how we can
make more sustainable choices
in our procurement, incorporating
a balanced climate and financial
approach to contracts, such as
optimising shipping and sourcing
to reduce GHG.
• Whakapuāwai nursery
Our biodiversity programme,
Whakapuāwai, grows tens of
thousands of native plants each
year. We provide these to our
farmers and community groups
for planting projects. FY25 saw us
distribute 80,000 plants, taking
the total to more than 320,000.
We now have years of plant
growing expertise to support our
farmer suppliers to sequester
carbon on their farms.
Synlait knows climate change is one of the biggest issues
facing the planet and we have a responsibility to take action
in this area. We have established science-based targets and
roadmaps to meet them.
We are also committed to:
Climate
PILLAR 1
Synlait's headquarters in
Dunsandel, Canterbury.
PAGE 09
SUSTAINABILITY REPORT
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
The key achievement for our
Climate pillar in FY25 was
further decreases to Synlait
farmers’ on-farm emissions.
The data shows that the
emissions produced per tonne
of milk solids decreased to
11.29 tCO
2
e/t MS, a decrease
of 13% on our FY20 base year.
Combined Scope 1 and 2 emissions
increased to 118,442 tCO
2
e (including
the two dairy farms owned by Synlait) or
110,491 without the farms’ emissions. This
was driven by Synlait’s energy sources,
including the use of coal, and changes to
the emission factor applied to electricity.
As detailed below, Synlait has secured
an agreement to deliver 100% renewable
electricity for our South Island operations
which will result in decreases to the
market-based electricity emission numbers
in the future.
In FY25, we continued to build on the
foundation established in FY24 with our
use of the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA)
method developed by the Bioeconomy
Science Institute (formerly AgResearch).
Now in its second year of implementation,
the LCA approach has enabled us
to further enhance the accuracy and
transparency of our on-farm emissions
reporting.
The expanded scope of data inputs –
including winter livestock management
Description of Metric/TargetFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25
Scope 3 On-Farm Emissions (tCO
2
e)753,615 704,537 999,255 1,084,438 1,049,338 1,024,331 1,016,154 946,144
Scope 3 On-Farm Emissions Per Tonne of Milk Solids (tCO
2
e/t MS)11.9511.1113.0512.4912.6612.1412.0311.29
Description of Metric/TargetFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25
Absolute Scope 1+2 GHG emissions (tCO
2
e) 108,002113,547126,304125,465127,036119,170110,649118,442
Total Scope 1+2, excluding Synlait Farms108,002113,547126,304125,465126,862113,572103,228 110,491
FY25 Mitigation Results – On-Farm
FY25 Mitigation Results – Operations
practices, treatment of peat soils, and land
use changes such as deforestation has
become embedded in our methodology,
providing a more comprehensive
and nuanced understanding of our
environmental footprint. This sustained
application of LCA is helping us track
progress more precisely and identify
targeted opportunities for emissions
reduction across farming operations.
1. Using the sun to power Synlait
Synlait has reached an agreement
with Simply Energy to procure 25% of
the electricity that will be generated
by Kōwhai Park, the 230-hectare
solar farm under construction on
Christchurch Airport’s campus. The
10-year agreement means Synlait’s
Dunsandel factory and Dairyworks
operations will be powered by
100% renewable electricity once the
farm starts commercial operations
(anticipated to be August 2026). Any
additional energy will be automatically
sold back to Simply Energy. The
168MWdc solar farm is being
constructed in a joint venture between
Contact Energy and Lightsource bp,
it will generate enough renewable
electricity to power the equivalent of
36,000 homes.
2. Cutting effluent pond emissions
on-farm
In partnership with Nestlé, Synlait
is involved in the country’s first
commercial rollout of Ecopond
technology that can lower the CO
2
e
emissions (including the measurement
of methane, nitrous oxide and carbon
dioxide emissions) generated by
farms’ effluent ponds by more than
90%. The technology was developed
by Ravensdown and Lincoln University,
before being commercialised by
Agnition. It uses polyferric sulphate
and sulphuric acid to treat effluent
ponds. A pilot project of 10 Synlait
farms in May 2025 delivered positive
results. A further 40 farms will now be
treated. Synlait’s and Nestlé’s support
of this technology has been pivotal in
enabling it to be commercialised.
3. Promising pilot for plant-based pellets
In 2022, Synlait converted one of
our boilers to run on biomass wood
pellets. Since then, demand for locally
produced pellets has outstripped
supply and we have been forced to
consume pellets from other parts of
New Zealand (including the North
Island), which impacts emissions
reductions. 2025 saw us take a large
step forward in sourcing a permanent
local supply. In partnership with one
of our farmers, we trialled pellets
made from a waste plant material in
Canterbury. There was some success,
however, more work needs to be
done to improve the durability of
the pellets, so they are less prone to
damage during storage, transportation
and handling. The project is a great
example of Synlait investing in an
innovation, which, if successful, will not
only allow our business to decarbonise
but potentially others too.
Key Initiatives and Results
CLIMATE
PAGE 10
SUSTAINABILITY REPORT
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
Synlait has secured 25% of the
electricity that will be generated by
the solar farm at Christchurch Airport.
Some of the plant-
based pellets that
were trialed at
Synlait during FY25.
• Water
With around 200 farms supplying
Synlait and irrigation critical to
their operations, our focus on
water is to work with these farmers
to maximise efficiency and ensure
we are working to improve and
protect water quality. Rather than
have one target for everyone, our
on-farm water quality targets are
focused on supporting our farmers
to act on the issues specific
to their catchment. Our target
is to achieve a 45% reduction
in modelled nitrogen loss to
waterways per kilogram of milk
solids from a 2018 base year by
2028. Each year we recalculate
this metric back to base year due
to updates in the modelled input
data. We are on track to achieve
this by the 2028 target date; we
have currently achieved a 38%
reduction compared to base year.
• Whakapuāwai
Our biodiversity programme has
made a significant contribution to
water quality via riparian planting
on farms since it was first launched
in 2019. Since then, Whakapuāwai
has distributed nearly 330,000
native plants across Canterbury.
Each species is chosen for its ability
to improve on-farm biodiversity.
Together with our farmers, the
programme has resulted in Synlait
growing its native plant knowledge
– we now collect our own seeds
from local area catchments so we
ensure the plants we raise are
suited to the environments they will
be planted in, maximising survival
rates. We will continue to grow
and share our knowledge with our
farmers and community groups.
• Circular Economy
Our targets in this area are
two-pronged. First, we seek
to recycle the non-hazardous
waste related to our operations.
Second, we want 100% of the
products we manufacture to be
packaged in reusable, recyclable
or compostable materials. We are
also working towards ensuring
50% of all packaging is made from
recyclable materials providing a
solution for materials that might
otherwise end up in landfill.
These commitments will extend right
throughout our value chain.
The second pillar of Synlait’s Sustainability Strategy is
Nature – this encapsulates our action on biodiversity, soil
health and water.
A summary of our approach to each of these areas is below.
Nature
PILLAR 2
SUSTAINABILITY REPORT
PAGE 11
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Description of Metric/TargetFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25
Modelled Nitrogen Loss to Waterways Grams
Per Kilogram of Milk Solids
38.8 39.6 34.6 30.628.726.3 26.124.1
Description of Metric/TargetFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25
Off-Farm Water Use Per Tonne of Product
(DUN)
13.8614.3614.6212.2712.9912.4616.0611.57
Nitrogen (in KG) Discharged Per Tonne of
Product (DUN and POK)
0.280.320.380.310.270.360.450.33
Description of Metric/TargetFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25
Non-Hazardous Waste Recycled84%78%79%80%85%71%82%85%
Product Packaging that is Reusable,
Recyclable, or Compostable – Synlait*
--99.3%99.1%99.2%99.7%99.6%99.4%
Product Packaging that is Reusable,
Recyclable, or Compostable – Dairyworks
------80%85%
Recycled Content Across Product Packaging
– Synlait**
------14.7%14.6%
Description of Metric/TargetFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25
Number of Native Trees and Shrubs Supplied
by Whakapuāwai
---54,29044,66461,66686,96980,000
- Number Supplied to Dunsandel Site---168144---
- Number Supplied to Synlait Supplier Farms---52,80240,90051,33653,48159,155
- Number Supplied to Community Projects---1,3203,62010,33033,48820,845
FY25 Water Results – On-Farm
FY25 Water Results – Off-Farm
FY25 Circular Economy Results – Off-Farm
FY24 Biodiversity Results
We took another step this
year towards reaching our
target to reduce modelled
nitrogen loss to waterways
off-farm by 45% on FY18
baseline levels.
We are now sitting at a 38% reduction
and on track to achieve 45% by our target
date of FY28. Our major lever to drive
this change is with the guidance provided
and incentives paid through Lead With
Pride™ but the progress is not just a result
of Synlait's hard work.
The gains have been made by the hard
work and focus of individual farmers,
the uptake of many different mitigation
techniques, changing regulations, and
dozens of workstreams led by catchment
groups and sector wide initiatives.
FY25 also saw us set a record for efficient
use of water in our manufacturing
operations with 11.57 used per tonne of
product produced.
1. Seeding education on biodiversity
FY25 was another big year for
Synlait’s biodiversity programme,
Whakapuāwai. As well as distributing
80,000 plants to dairy farms
and community projects across
Canterbury, the programme held its
first on-site workshop for farmers
on how to maximise the survival
rate of their on-farm plantings.
The programme grew more than
40 species this year – many from
seeds collected in local ecosystems
to ensure the opportunity to boost
biodiversity is maxmised. Each
species was chosen due to its ability
to boost biodiversity on-farm.
This is a legacy project for Synlait,
and many of our farmers, are proud
these plantings will benefit the
environment for future generations.
2. Every bit counts when it comes to
recycling
During the year, we identified an
opportunity to repurpose pails
previously sent to landfill. The
Dunsandel maintenance team has
begun using these pails to store
tools and equipment, reducing waste
and avoiding the need to purchase
new containers. We have also made
pails available for staff to reuse, with
more than 100 diverted from landfill
in the past month alone. It’s a small
change, but one that contributes to
our waste reduction goals over time.
* The decrease in total packaging (%) that is reusable/recyclable/or compostable (and total recycled content %) is due to the difference in sales split between product groups.
** Calculated as a percentage of total packaging sold (includes primary, secondary and tertiary packaging as sold leaving SML). Weighted by product sales (MT).
Key Initiatives and Results
NATURE
PAGE 12
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Synlait's biodiversity programme, Whakapuāwai,
grew and distributed 80,000 plants during FY25.
Wellbeing
PILLAR 3
• Animal wellbeing
On farm, our Lead With Pride™
programme ensures we take a
leadership position on animal
wellbeing. We had planned on
developing a Social Responsibility
Strategy and working with all our
Lead With Pride™ farmers on a
customised Animal Health and
Welfare Plan in FY25 but these
workstreams will now be tackled
in FY26.
• Looking after our people
Within Synlait, work is underway
on our Wellbeing Roadmap, which
will guide actions to improve
wellbeing going forward. This
roadmap will focus on meaningful
work, work design, connectedness
and diversity.
• Gender equity
From a gender perspective, we
have already achieved our target
of having between 40% and
50% of our senior managers or
specialists as women. We retain
this target to ensure we continue
to track to this. Our Gender Pay
Gap is one key objective that has
not met expectations to date.
• Health and Safety
We remain committed to the
Health and Safety of our people
and will continue to dedicate
ourselves to driving our Total
Recordable Injury Frequency
Rate down to below five by 2029.
Caring for the wellbeing of people and animals right throughout
our value chain is the third pillar of our Sustainability Strategy.
SUSTAINABILITY REPORT
PAGE 13INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Area Manager
Annie McLaren on farm.
Description of Metric/TargetFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25
Gender Pay Gap* – Synlait18%13%13%10%14%13%11%14%
Gender Pay Gap – Dairyworks---32%29%29%30%20%
Total Recordable Injury Frequency Rate
(TRIFR)** – Synlait
18.913.79.921.014.910.615.013.5
Women as Managers and Senior Specialists –
Synlait
34%36%37%36%37%40%43%41%
Women as Managers and Senior Specialists –
Dairyworks
---24%25%39%35%37%
Description of Metric/TargetFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25
Somatic Cell Count (SCC)155,000152,700148,219146,218147,000147,000145,063140,000
Average Length of Farmer Partnership with
Synlait in Years
- South Island*-6.87. 88.08.99.79.710.6
- North Island*--1.01.92.72.83.64.4
Lead With Pride™ Certified Farmer Suppliers*28%49%57%62%69%77%77%81%
FY25 People Wellbeing Results
FY25 Animal Wellbeing Results
* as of 31 May 2025.
Synlait's Sustainability
Strategy includes targets
to improve the wellbeing of
both people and animals.
Key achievements this year have been a
new record for somatic cell count (SCC)
which is a core way to measure animal
wellbeing in dairy cows. Synlait’s average
for FY25 was 140,000 which is well below
the industry target of 150,000.
From a people perspective, Synlait met
its target to have at least 40% of women
as managers and senior specialists with
a total of 41% (Dairyworks was slightly
behind at 37%). Dairyworks made
excellent progress in closing its gender
pay gap from 30% in FY24 to 20% this
year, while Synlait’s widened from 11% to
14% year-on-year.
1. Synlait’s first Modern Slavery
Statement
Modern Slavery legislation in
Australia has been the driving force
behind Synlait publishing our first
Modern Slavery Statement earlier
this year. The publication, which was
submitted to the Australian Modern
Slavery Register in January 2025,
reiterates Synlait’s commitment to
conducting ethical business and to
developing our approach to better
align with best practices for human
rights due diligence under the
United Nations Guiding Principles
on Business and Human Rights. In
the document we acknowledge the
inherent risks of modern slavery in
our supply chains and operations,
identify how existing programmes
support our response and outline
planned next steps for maturing
our systems and controls. The full
statement can be accessed on
our website. Our Modern Slavery
Statement is not just a compliance
document – it represents our values
and commitment to ethical business
practices.
2. A new approach to calf rearing
In a project sponsored by Nestlé,
calves at Synlait’s Dunsandel farms
are given the best chance for a
healthy life with an ad lib feeding
programme helping them create
resilience from the beginning.
The programme gives calves ad lib
access to milk, typically consuming
around 10 litres per day. This
feeding approach allows natural
drinking behaviour with smaller,
more frequent meals, supporting
optimal digestion, steady growth,
and improved welfare. Calves
also have ad lib access to meal,
hay, and grass, encouraging early
rumen development and a smooth
transition to solid feed. To ensure
calves are progressing well, each
calf is DNA tested and fitted with
a SenseHub monitoring tag that
records activity, feeding behaviour
and enables the earlier detection
and treatment of health and welfare
concerns. This approach is better for
the calf with research showing that
it creates a more resilient mature
cow. This is important because it
potentially enables the number
of replacement animals to be
reduced over time. This reduction
in replacements will have a positive
impact on GHG emissions, Nitrogen
loss, and farm profitability. The next
step for this project is to share the
outcomes with other farmers and
encourage wider uptake with Synlait
farmers.
* Organisation wide gender pay gap is calculated as the median gender pay gap (calculating using the average pay gap = 8.7%).
* TRIFR – Total Recordable Injury Frequency Rate (TRIFR) is calculated as (annual total of recordable injuries (medical and lost time) x 1,000,000 hours)/actual employee hours
worked. As at 31 July 2025.
The calves at Synlait's Dunsandel farms were
part of an ad lib feeding programme this year.
Key Initiatives and Results
WELLBEING
PAGE 14
SUSTAINABILITY REPORT
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Climate-Related
Disclosures
CHAPTER TWO
PAGE 15
CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES FY25
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Independent Directors
Governance
SECTION ONE
1.1 Board of Directors
This is Synlait's Board of Directors as at the date of publication.
Paul Washer served as an Independent Director throughout the reporting period and retired at the Annual General
Meeting in November 2025.
Paul McGilvary
• People, Environment
and Governance
Committee Member
• Audit and Risk
Committee Member
Leon Fung
• Chair of People,
Environment
and Governance
Committee
Edward Yang
Julia Zhu
• Chair of Audit and
Risk Committee
Tao Zhang
George Adams
• Chair of the Board
• Audit and Risk
Committee Member
• People, Environment
and Governance
Committee Member
Bright Dairy Appointed Directors
The Synlait Board of Directors
is responsible for the overall
governance of the company,
including the oversight of climate-
related risks and opportunities.
This involves setting strategic
priorities, ensuring compliance with
environmental regulations, and
integrating sustainable practices
into the company’s operations. The
Board considers and addresses
all significant matters impacting
Synlait. The Board Charter, which
is available on our website, details
its role and responsibilities. These
include strategic planning, financial
performance, executive management,
audit and risk management,
corporate governance, performance
evaluation, workplace health and
safety, ethical conduct, and climate-
related risks and opportunities.
Governance and operations
The Board is the ultimate decision-
making body of Synlait and is
accountable to shareholders for the
company’s performance in building
sustainable value. It advances
the interests of shareholders,
employees, customers, and other
key stakeholders by acting honestly,
faithfully, intelligently, and in
accordance with applicable laws.
The Board sets the overall tone
for the culture, performance, and
accountability of Synlait. We are
committed to maintaining high
standards of corporate governance
and regularly review our performance
with best practice guidelines.
Climate-related responsibilities
The Board’s climate-related
responsibilities include endorsing
the company’s Sustainability Strategy
and key initiatives, as well as non-
financial success measures such
as climate and nature frameworks,
metrics, commitments, targets, and
policies. The Board monitors the
company’s exposure to climate-
related risks and opportunities,
ensuring the resilience of the
company’s strategy and value chain
to climate impacts, and evaluating
the financial implications of climate-
related risks and opportunities.
Delegation of responsibilities
The Board delegates certain functions
to its committees who oversee
specific areas of the business and
report back to the Board after each
meeting. Additionally, the Board
delegates the day-to-day running
of the company to the CEO, who
works closely with the Executive
Leadership Team (ELT). The ELT briefs
the Board on sustainability issues,
including climate-related risks and
opportunities, throughout the year.
Synlait ensures the Board has the
appropriate skills and competencies
to oversee climate-related risks and
opportunities by regularly reviewing
director capabilities, seeking
external expertise where needed,
and providing ongoing education
on emerging sustainability and
climate governance practices as
opportunities arise. More information
about the skills the Board has is
available on the Board Skills Matrix on
the next page.
Board Oversight and Governance
PAGE 16
CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES FY25
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
1.2 Board Skills Matrix Update
Number of Directors (Total 6)
Level of Capability
Capability DescriptionHighMedium
Consumer ProductsExperience as a senior executive in, or as a professional advisor to,
consumer products businesses, including sales and marketing, product
innovation and supply chain.
Data and TechnologyExperience in the implementation of digital transformation or new digital
product development, including digital marketing and commerce, and
leveraging data and technology in a consumer products business.
Financial AcumenUnderstanding of financial statements and reporting, key
drivers of financial performance, corporate finance and internal
controls.
Food and Manufacturing
Safety and Quality
Technical or managerial experience relating to food, food product
development and the development and/or implementation and
management of safe practices for the sourcing, production, transport and
distribution of food.
GovernanceExperience in and commitment to the highest standards of corporate
governance, including as a non-executive director of a listed company,
large or complex organisation or government body, or through former
C-suite executive experience in a large organisation.
International Business
Experience
Experience as a senior executive in, or as a professional to, international
businesses with exposure to global markets and a range of different
political, regulatory and business environments.
LeadershipExperience in a senior management position in a listed company, large or
complex organisation or government body, including experience in leading
strategy development and execution.
Health and SafetyExperience in the development of health, safety and wellbeing frameworks
and risk-management tools at large organisations, or experience in health
and safety leadership positions.
People and CultureLeadership experience in the oversight, development and implementation
of people and culture programmes at large organisations, people
management, development and succession planning, setting remuneration
frameworks and promoting diversity and inclusion.
Risk ManagementExperience in identification, assessment, monitoring and management
of material financial and non-financial risks and understanding,
implementation and oversight of risk management frameworks and
controls.
StrategyExperience in strategic oversight, including the development and
implementation of strategic plans for organisations of similar scale and
complexity to Synlait.
SustainabilityKnowledge, understanding or experience in sustainable practices to
manage the impact of business operations on the environment and
community and the impact of climate change on the company.
Industry Involvement
and Advocacy
Experience in being a leading voice within the food or consumer goods
industry.
A skills matrix ensures the Board has the appropriate skills and competencies
for oversight. The Board skills matrix evaluates understanding and identification
of climate-related risks and opportunities.
Audit and Risk Committee
The Audit and Risk Committee
is responsible for monitoring the
company’s performance against its
Sustainability Strategy and targets,
particularly those related to climate
change. This includes assessing
progress towards sustainability
goals, ensuring adherence to
climate-related targets, and regularly
reviewing compliance with relevant
laws and regulations. The Committee
focuses on identifying, assessing,
and mitigating environmental and
climate-related risks, reviewing
climate-related disclosures for
legislative and regulatory adherence,
monitoring performance against
climate initiatives, and evaluating
capital allocation decisions to ensure
alignment with climate targets.
Key Highlights
• Composition: Consists of
a majority of independent
directors. The CEO, CFO, Head of
Legal and Governance (also the
Company Secretary), and Senior
Independent Assurance, Risk
and Compliance Manager have
standing invitations to attend the
meetings.
• Meetings: At least four times
throughout the year, with updates
provided to the Board.
• Committee Papers: Compliance
Reports are standing agenda
items. The report covers key
reporting on environmental laws
and regulations and other areas
of compliance and concern
1.3 Sub-Committees of the Board
across Synlait’s operating
business. All Board members
have access to the Audit and
Risk Committee papers to
ensure appropriate oversight
and provide all directors with key
information.
• Enterprise and Strategic Risk
Management: The Committee
oversees enterprise risk and
strategic risk management. This
function is run in conjunction
with the ELT and Synlait’s Senior
Independent Assurance, Risk
and Compliance Manager. Key
workstreams are dedicated to
identifying and monitoring risks in
this space. Climate-related risks
and opportunities are embedded
in Synlait’s risk management
framework.
The People, Environment, and
Governance Committee is responsible
for overseeing the company’s
sustainability initiatives, with a
focus on social and environmental
governance. This includes managing
the company’s approach to climate
related risks and promoting ethical
practices. The Committee works
to integrate sustainable practices
into the company’s culture and
operations, fostering a commitment
to environmental stewardship and
social responsibility. Additionally, the
Committee monitors progress towards
sustainability goals and ensures
alignment with the company’s broader
Sustainability Strategy.
Key Highlights
• Composition: Consists of
a majority of independent
directors. The CEO, CFO, Director
of Safety, People and Culture,
Director of On-Farm Excellence,
Business Sustainability and
Corporate Affairs, Head of
Legal and Governance (also the
Company Secretary), and Senior
Independent Assurance, Risk
and Compliance Manager have
standing invitations to attend the
meetings.
• Meetings: At least five times
throughout the year, with updates
provided to the Board.
• Committee Papers: Sustainability
Dashboard and Sustainability
Update papers are standing
agenda items. In addition, the
ELT presents a variety of other
sustainability or compliance
related papers and deep dive
topics across the year. All
Board members have access
to the People, Environment and
Governance Committee papers
to ensure appropriate oversight
and provide all directors with key
information.
People, Environment and Governance Committee
= One Director
PAGE 17
CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES FY25
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
1.4 Our Executive Leadership Team
Richard Wyeth
Chief Executive
Officer
Andy Liu
Chief Financial
Officer
Glenn Laing
Director of
Manufacturing
Stephanie Manning
Director of Safety,
People and Culture
Rob Stowell
Chief Commercial
Officer
Paul Mallard
Chief Operating
Officer¹
Hila Mory
General Manager
Quality
Naiche Nogueira
Chief Revenue
Officer¹
,
²
Abby Ye
President China and
Director of Foodservice
Charles Fergusson
Director On-Farm
Excellence, Business
Sustainability and
Corporate Affairs
Tim Carter
Dairyworks Chief
Executive Officer
Executive Leadership Team
The Executive Leadership Team (ELT)
is responsible for monitoring and
managing the company’s climate-
related risks and developing the
Sustainability Strategy. This includes
setting and achieving specific targets,
integrating sustainable practices into
all aspects of the business, ensuring
compliance with environmental
regulations, and fostering a
culture of sustainability throughout
the organisation. Synlait has an
internal strategic and goal-focused
accountability framework that starts
with the ELT. This framework involves
setting annual targets for strategic
objectives, which then cascades down
to individual goals for team members.
Composition
Led by the CEO Richard Wyeth, the
ELT for Synlait has nine key executives
responsible for various aspects of
the business denoted by their titles.
Dairyworks is led by Tim Carter who
also forms part of the Synlait ELT.
Responsibilities
• The CEO ensures alignment with
the company’s sustainability goals.
• Key executives oversee specific
climate-related responsibilities,
such as milk supply, sustainability
initiatives, and financial strategy.
• Throughout the year, ELT
members engage with the Board
and its committees by attending
meetings and presenting papers.
At least 12 formal meetings are
held annually, with participation
from ELT and management.
• Each ELT member manages
teams that inform them of matters
material to climate risk and
opportunity. The ELT monitors
relevant KPIs depending on their
role. They are informed of updates
by their team through meetings,
reports, escalation processes,
or less formally if relevant. The
frequency of this is determined on
a team-by-team basis.
• ELT members are delegated
decision-making power by the
Board to address climate-related
risks and opportunities.
• Several key management
functions play significant roles in
managing Synlait’s climate-related
risks and opportunities.
These include:
• Chief Financial Officer (CFO):
Integrates climate-related risks
into the long-term financial
strategy, using financial modelling
and scenario analysis. Oversees
reporting on climate-related risks
and opportunities. The Group
Financial Controller assists the
CFO in these obligations.
• Chief Commercial Officer (CCO):
Reporting to the CCO, the Senior
Independent Assurance, Risk and
Compliance Manager supports the
business and Board by ensuring
audits and sustainability reporting
are completed and climate-related
risks are embedded into the
organisation. Together with the
Head of Legal and Governance
and Company Secretary, this
function monitors compliance with
laws and regulations.
• Business Sustainability and
On-Farm Excellence Teams:
Led by the Director of On-Farm
Excellence, Business Sustainability
and Corporate Affairs, the
sustainability team implements
and advances the company’s
sustainability initiatives. This
includes managing climate-
related risks, developing and
executing sustainability strategies,
and setting measurable targets.
The team ensures compliance
with environmental regulations
and promotes a culture of
sustainability. They collaborate
with stakeholders to drive
continuous improvement in
environmental stewardship and
corporate social responsibility. The
On-Farm Excellence Team focuses
on Synlait’s farmer supplier base,
ensuring competitiveness and
accelerating environmental and
greenhouse gas reduction targets.
A key feature is the Lead with
Pride™ program, run with farmer
suppliers.
¹ Naiche Nogueira and Paul Mallard will be leaving Synlait in December 2025.
² Hamish Yates has been appointed Synlait's new Chief Revenue Officer and will be joining the business in December 2025.
PAGE 18
CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES FY25
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
1.5 Governance Structure
Key
Reports to
Delegation and oversight
Responsible for
Indirect reporting obligations
1.6 Remuneration
• Board remuneration is independently
assessed, and ELT remuneration
is linked to financial outcomes and
share market performance.
• In FY25, remuneration has not been
linked to climate metrics.
Executive Leadership Level
Board Level
Board of Directors
Executive Leadership Team
ELT level roles are
responsible for reporting
climate-related risks and
opportunities to the board
level – refer to descriptions
on page 18 for more details.
Governance body committee
level responsibilities detailed
on page 17
Governance body level
responsibilities detailed on
page 16
Sustainability TeamSupply Chain Team
Head of Financial
Reporting and Tax
Head of Legal and
Governance, and
Company Secretary
Management level roles are
responsible for identifying,
managing and reporting
climate-related risks and
opportunities to the ELT
level – refer to descriptions
on page 18 for more details.
Independent
Assurance, Risk
and Compliance
Management Level
People, Environment, and
Governance Committee
Audit and Risk Committee
PAGE 19
CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES FY25
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Strategy
SECTION TWO
Synlait is a nutrition
company. It combines
expert farming with
state-of-the art processing
to produce Advanced
Nutrition, Foodservice,
and Ingredient products
In the year to 31 July 2025,
Synlait made no changes
to its company structures.
In April 2024, Synlait initiated a
strategic review of its North Island
assets as part of its business recovery
plan. The review explored a wide
range of options, including alternative
ownership structures, mothballing the
Pōkeno plant, and how to balance its
capability to process both dairy and
plant-based proteins.
In September 2024, Synlait
announced that the Board had
decided to focus Pōkeno’s operations
solely on producing advanced
nutrition products that do not require
raw milk. This decision followed
the strategic review's finding that
alternating between processing plant-
based proteins and raw dairy milk at
Pōkeno was hindering operational
efficiency.
Post the 31 July balance date, in
September, Synlait subsequently
announced the sale of its North Island
Transition Risks and Opportunities Physical Risks and Opportunities
Risk: Increased customer pressure to meet carbon reduction targets.
FY25 Result: In the period, Synlait incurred $4,811,013 in transition
related costs which includes, physical risk modelling, climate
disclosure reporting, including measurement and assurance of GHG
emissions, costs associated with Science Based Targets, AgriZero
NZ
,
LWP and Whakapuāwai programme.
Risk: Increasing occurrence of extreme weather events (like
hot days, drought, high rainfall, high winds and flooding
events causing operational pressure and disruption on farm.
FY25 Result: Synlait has not incurred any material expenses
during the reporting period.
Risk: Cross-sector demand for biomass fuels increases as
New Zealand transitions to low emissions heat and power
FY25 Result: Synlait incurred transition costs related to biomass and
biomass availability but is currently unable to disclose this amount due
to commercial sensitivities.
a
ssets to global healthcare leader,
Abbott, which has been a customer
of Synlait since 2020.
The two companies negotiated the
sale and purchase of Synlait’s North
I
sland assets – these are the Pōkeno
manufacturing facility, along with the
company’s Auckland sites (assets
held at the blending and canning
facility on Richard Pearse Drive and
the warehouse facility on Jerry Green
Street), and associated inventory
and leasehold arrangements. The
sale price is approximately NZ$307
million, and the targeted completion
date is 1 April 2026.
The Board has had to be short-term
in its thinking as Synlait resolved the
company’s balance sheet issues.
Now we are nearly free from those,
the Board and Management have
clear air to carefully and strategically
ex plore a wide array of opportunities
for the company’s future. The Board
is currently reviewing Synlait’s
future strategy and is aiming to
have a plan in place to share with all
stakeholders by March 2026.
In the interim, FY26 is seeing Synlait
shift from reactive recovery to
proactive performance. To achieve
this, we have defined six key focus
areas, with measurable KPIs, to
deliver this shift, internally these are
known as “Our Big 6 for ’26” and are
set out to the right.
2.1 Current Impacts
Understanding and addressing
climate-related risks and opportunities
is critical to Synlait’s long-term
resilience and sustainability.
To consider if any climate impacts
have been experienced by Synlait in
the reporting period, we looked at
any acute climate-related attributable
weather events; any changes to
policy settings or regulations enacted;
or tangible market, technology or
reputational shifts evident within the
current reporting period. We also
reviewed our climate-related risks and
opportunities to assess if any related
impacts had occurred.
As a result, there has been no change
to Synlait’s core business model
or operations from climate change
impacts.
However, this year, for the first time,
we have quantified the current
financial impacts of the physical and
transition impacts identified.
The table below outlines the current
physical and transition impacts
experiences across Synlait's business
operations within the reporting year.
PAGE 20
CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES FY25
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Orderly
The Orderly Scenario describes a future where coordinated
global climate action limits warming to 1.5°C, with emissions
steadily reducing to net zero by 2050. Strong policy,
technological innovation, and green investment drive a
managed transition, resulting in moderate transition risk
and low physical climate risk exposure and vulnerability.
Consumer demand, regulation, and trade pressures
accelerate decarbonisation, particularly in agriculture and
energy.
• Network for Greening the Financial System (NGFS) –
Net Zero and Highway to Paris
• IPCC AR5, AR6 – SSP1-RCP1.9
• Climate Change Commision – Tailwinds
• Agriculture Sector Climate Change Scenarios –
Tū-ā-pae, Stance in order, step in succession
Disorderly
The Disorderly Scenario reflects a delayed and politically
fragmented response to climate change, followed by sudden
and severe policy intervention after 2027. Transition risks are
high due to rapid regulatory change, volatile carbon prices,
and disruptive market shifts, while physical climate risks
intensify over time. Businesses face inflationary pressures,
increased compliance costs, financial instability, and pressure
to decarbonise abruptly in response to tightening global trade
and emissions standards.
• NGFS – Delayed Transition and Sudden Wake-up Call
• IPCC AR5, AR6 – SSP1-RCP2.6
• Climate Change Commission – Headwinds
• Agriculture Sector Climate Change Scenarios –
Tū-ā-hopo, Misstep
Regional policy
variation
High
variation
Policy
reaction
Delayed
Policy
ambition
1.8 ̊C
Technology
change
Slow/fast
change
CDR
(CO₂ removal)
Low-medium
use
Hot House World
The Hot House World Scenario assumes limited global
climate action, leading to temperature increases exceeding
3°C and extreme, irreversible climate impacts. Transition risks
remain low due to minimal policy change, but physical risks
are catastrophic, driving major disruption to supply chains,
land use, food security, and economic stability. Social unrest
and environmental degradation rise sharply, creating severe
long-term challenges for business viability and resilience.
• NGFS – Current Policies and Disasters and Policy
Stagnation
• IPCC AR5, AR6 – SSP5-RCP8.5
• Climate Change Commision – Current Policies
• Agriculture Sector Climate Change Scenarios –
Tū-ā-tapape, Faltered step, to fall
Regional policy
variation
Low
variation
Policy
reaction
Delayed
Policy
ambition
3 ̊C+
Technology
change
Slow
change
CDR
(CO₂ removal)
Low use
Summary of Synlait’s Orderly, Disorderly and Hot House World Scenario
Regional policy
variation
Medium
variation
Policy
reaction
Immediate and
smooth
Policy
ambition
1.4 ̊C
Technology
change
Fast
change
CDR
(CO₂ removal)
Medium-high
use
2.2 Scenario Analysis
Undertaken
To assess our exposure to transition risks,
we adopted the SSP1-1.9; SSP2-2.6; and
SSP5-8.5 which represent our 1.5 degrees
Celsius climate-related scenario; our 3
degrees Celsius or greater climate-related
scenario; and our third (1.8 degrees
Celsius) climate-related scenario.
To assess our exposure to physical risks,
we adopted the RCP 2.6, RCP 4.5 and
RCP 8.5 scenarios. These then fed into
our three Synlait scenarios narratives
(which we have named Orderly, Disorderly
and Hot House World) around which to
contextualise the future under different
warming scenarios and time frame. In
FY25, we updated our scenarios to
capture material macroeconomic and
geopolitical changes, and to reflect
emerging climate science and any
updates to climate data sets.
We believe these scenarios are relevant
and appropriate to assessing the
resilience of the entity’s business model
and strategy to climate-related risks and
opportunities because they align with the
guidance provided by the Aotearoa Circle
for the purpose of sector level scenario
analysis, the availability of data from
NIWA, alignment with NZCS1 standard
(paragraph 13) and comparability of the
result with peers.
More information about the full scenario
analysis process is available in the risk
management section. Full descriptions of
each scenario are available in Appendix 4.
PAGE 21
CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES FY25
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Synlait adopted three time horizons against which to assess our risks and opportunities
against each of our three warming scenario narratives. The time horizons are
determined by an end point in time, as set out in the table below.
These have been updated from previously disclosed time horizons due to the previous
short term time horizon lapsing (the previous short-term horizon ended in 2025). We
have also offset the start of the following time horizons, e.g. 2031-2050 to ensure there
is no cross over.
2.3 Time Horizons
Timeframe Definitions and Alignments
Short2025-2030
(5 years)
Aligns with and incorporates our corporate
strategy and short-term sustainability goals
(such as our science-based targets and
AgriZero
NZ
investment) which have targets
ending in in FY28.
Medium2031-2050
(20 years)
Aligns with and incorporates our 10-year asset
planning cycle and capital deployment plans.
Long2051-2100
(50 years)
Aligns with and incorporates our long-term
strategic planning cycles and beyond.
PAGE 22
CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES FY25
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
2.4 Physical Climate-related Risks
At RiskRisk DescriptionAnticipated ImpactsTime Horizon
and Scenario
for Impact
Strategic Mitigations
Synlait’s Supply
Chain
Extreme weather events cause asset damage and disrupt supply chain
operations, leading to inventory write-offs and unplanned manufacturing
plant shutdowns, reducing productivity and revenue.
Extreme weather events are occurring with increasing frequency and intensity, disrupting access to critical inputs (e.g. lactose,
solid fuel, key minerals, bottling/canning supplies, and other imported products required for food safety and hygiene). These
disruptions may result in unplanned manufacturing plant shut downs, reducing productivity and revenue.
Short
(Present Day)
Regularly review inbound logistics and supply chain
risk to determine key risk areas to develop mitigation
strategies.
Extreme weather events (storms and flood) occur with increasing frequency and intensity impacting truck drivers ability to collect
and deliver key inputs (e.g. solid fuel and milk supply), and impairing site access generally. These disruptions may result in
unplanned manufacturing plant shut downs, reducing productivity and revenue.
Long
(RCP 8.5)
Extreme winds occur with increasing frequency and intensity causing bridge and road closures disrupting tankers used to
transport milk to the Synlait manufacturing sites. This may result in lower productivity and increased levels of spoiled milk.
Short
(Present Day)
Extreme weather events occur with increasing frequency and intensity impacting farmers’ ability to source key inputs (e.g. solid
fuel), preventing farmers performing duties such as milking and feeding out. This may result in increased pressure on the supply
chain, and reduced volumes of milk supplied to Synlait.
Long
(RCP 4.5)
Synlait’s Operations
and Assets
Increasing temperatures and more frequent extreme weather events
accelerate asset wear and cause physical damage to infrastructure,
disrupt plant operations and increase operating costs, leading to higher
capital expenditure, inventory write-offs, lower productivity and revenue,
and potential harm to overall financial performance and brand reputation.
An increasing number of hot days causes brown outs as businesses use more electricity on HVAC for their manufacturing.
This may result in the closure of Synlait’s manufacturing sites, leading to manufacturing site downtime and lower productivity.
Medium
(RCP 4.5)
Integrate climate impacts into Synlait’s 10 Year Asset
Planning framework.
Develop scenarios and contingency plans in
collaboration with the Synlait Manufacturing and
Operations team
Extreme weather events occur with increasing frequency and intensity impacting Synlait’s ability to access key inputs (e.g. solid
fuel). This may result in unplanned manufacturing plant shut downs and lower productivity.
Medium
(RCP 8.5)
Synlait’s Milk Suppliers’
Operations On-Farm
Extreme weather events, an increase in invasive pest species and
changing weather patterns cause asset damage, animal welfare concerns
and disrupt on-farm operations and equipment, leading to productivity
losses, reduced milk quality and a reduction in revenue.
Extreme winds occur with increasing frequency and intensity causing irrigation pivots to topple, impacting the milk as land is
unable to be irrigated for extended periods of time. This may result in less milk due to less feed availability.
Long Term
(RCP 4.5)
Support our Synlait suppliers with customised farm
resilience plans incorporating climate adaptation and
share knowledge of climate risks when relevant.
Continue to support Synlait Suppliers through our
Lead with Pride™ programme and payments.
An increasing incidence of invasive pests species impacts on animal welfare, negatively impacting milk production. This may
result a reduction in milk quality and supply volumes.
Long Term
(RCP 4.5)
During periods of extreme drought there will be an increase in demand to send stock to the freezing works due to the inability
to provide shelter, feed and water stock (milking the cows would not be cost effective). This may result in a decrease in the milk
supply as it takes up to two years to bring milk producing stock levels back up to normal levels.
Medium
(RCP 8.5)
A decrease in the number of cool nights impacts the ability of farmers to produce feed for cattle (rye grass has an optimal soil
temperature, which impacts growth rates). Reduced feed may result in decreased volumes of milk supplied and an increase in
the cost per unit of milk.
Long Term
(RCP 4.5)
The following list details the most material physical risks faced by Synlait. These risks were identified by a diverse panel of stakeholders who were considered subject matter experts in their areas of expertise. This review took place during the FY25 year and more
information about the process is contained in the risk management section of this report. Time horizons have been determined by identifying the scores assigned to each risk and then assigning the time horizon and scenario corresponding to the highest risk score.
In the event that across all the time horizons and scenarios the same score was applied then the nearest time horizon to today was chosen. The present day time horizon represents an Orderly transition.
Notes:
1. The location for all of the risks identied in this table covers all Synlait’s operations in Canterbury and the supply chain that supports the Canterbury operations.
2. The financial cost anticipated from theses impacts is currently being calculated and understood. In line with adoption provisions granted by the FMA, Synlait
will provide information related to the financial cost anticipated when future editions are published.
PAGE 23
CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES FY25
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
2.5 Transition-related Risks
Time horizons have been determined by identifying the scores assigned to each risk and then assigning the time horizon and scenario corresponding to the highest risk score. In the event that across all the time horizons and scenarios the same score was applied then
the nearest time horizon to today was chosen. The present day time horizon represents an Orderly transition.
At RiskRisk DescriptionAnticipated ImpactsTime Horizon
and Scenario
for Impact
Strategic Mitigations
Market Increased customer pressure to meet carbon reduction targets could
lead to market exclusion and financial penalties if not met. Additionally,
inadequate emissions tracking, and logistical challenges may further
jeopardize revenue and market access.
Increasing prices due to carbon-related import tariffs and domestic carbon taxes impact the ability to export into key markets.
This may result in market share loss and revenue loss.
Short
(Present Day)
Deliver year on year GHG Reductions in Scope 1,
2 & 3.
Deliver on our roadmap to meet Synlait’s SBTi
Targets of -45% reduction in Scope 1 & 2 and -30%
reduction in Scope 3.
Continue external review and verification of GHG
Reporting.
Missed GHG targets may result in reduced sales volume, and increased purchase of other brands that are achieving
(less ambitious) emissions targets.
Medium
(Delayed)
Financial contraints may impede Synlait’s efforts to decarbonise, resulting in missed targets. Short
(Present Day)
Increased customer pressure to transition to low carbon production processes. This may present a risk of increased capital
expenditure requirements to convert assets from coal fired to biomass boilers.
Medium
(Delayed)
Regulatory and LegalSynlait’s ability to meet its emissions reduction targets could lead to
costly liabilities, increased compliance costs, missed tax incentives,
Directors’ fiduciary duty risk, and potential litigation costs.
Failure to accurately quantify and track carbon emissions inventory due to inadequate systems could result in green-washing
allegations and/or financial penalties, consumer defection and loss of revenue.
Short
(Present Day)
Continue to monitor availability of low carbon fuel
and regulatory GHG reduction requirements.
Deliver on our roadmap to meet Synlait’s SBTi
Targets of -45% reduction in Scope 1 & 2 and -30%
reduction in Scope 3.
Continue external review and verification of GHG
Reporting.
Failure to decarbonise in line with set targets may result in costly carbon offset liability exposure.Medium
(Orderly)
Synlait is perceived by customers as failing to exert sufficient influence over its supply chain to decarbonise resulting in
customer dissatisfaction and or loss
Short
(Present Day)
TechnologyTechnological limitations within the New Zealand and pastural farming
context may increase liability and Synlait’s’ ability to meet its carbon
reduction obligations.
Cross-sector demand for biomass fuels increases as New Zealand transitions to low emissions heat and power generation.
This may result in supply insecurity and rising biomass prices, as Synlait competes to secure enough biomass to fire its boilers.
Short
(Present Day
Leverage our investment in AgriZero
NZ
to ensure
access to methane and nitrous oxide technologies in
Aotearoa.
Continue to monitor and follow best practice in GHG
accounting.
Continue to investigate alternative biomass supply.
Synlait faces increased pressure from the regulator and customers to transition to zero carbon production processes.
This may present a risk of Synlait being left with sunk investments.
Short
(Present Day
Notes:
1. The location for all of the risks identified in this table cover all Synlait’s operations in Canterbury and the supply chain that supports the Canterbury operations.
2. The financial cost anticipated from theses impacts is currently being calculated and understood. In line with adoption provisions granted by the FMA, Synlait
will provide information related to the financial cost anticipated when future editions are published.
PAGE 24
CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES FY25
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
2.6 Physical and Transition Opportunities
At RiskRisk DescriptionOpportunity TypeSector or Company SpecificTime HorizonPotential Anticipated Impacts
MarketsPhysical climate change impacts globally may make dairying in New Zealand more viable relative to other
markets. This may present internationally competitive opportunities to increase the number of customers,
revenue and margin and to optimise asset efficiency.
PhysicalRelevant to New Zealand SectorMedium Access to new markets and customers.
Low emissions production offsets long distance
logistics challenges for NZ companies.
On-Farm Extreme weather events and changes in rainfall patterns may necessitate on-farm diversification, resulting in
the generation of new revenue streams for farmers.
PhysicalRelevant to New Zealand SectorMedium Longer milking seasons.
Opportunities to use low-carbon energy.
New logistics and transportation options emerge which
both lower cost and increase margin.
Reputation Opportunities exist for Synlait to obtain discounted debt from sustainable finance if emissions can be reduced.
A strong performance in emissions reduction could result in Synlait attracting and retaining higher calibre
employees and customers because of proven performance.
TransitionRelevant to Synlait specificallyMediumAccess to low interest capital.
Potential increased margins.
Increased regulatory scrutiny and fines for competitors.
Gain access to tax incentives.
ProductsChanges in consumer demand could result in it becoming more profitable for Synlait to produce lower
embodied emission non-dairy products alongside the traditional products enhancing the diversity of the
product portfolio.
TransitionRelevant to Synlait specificallyMediumAccess to new markets and customers.
Access to low interest capital.
Potential Increased margins.
New product opportunities.
PAGE 25
CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES FY25
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
2.7 Transition Plan
Our transition plan is divided into two key areas: on-farm and off-farm. As these are two integral parts of our business that need to transition to a climate-resilient future but will require radically different approaches. These transition plans work in tandem across time
horizons and will be updated as activities and opportunities evolve. Our transition plan has not been updated in this reporting period. This reflects that progress remains aligned with the original plan, with no new information requiring changes to the planned actions,
interim (where relevant) and FY28 targets, or time horizons.
O
U
R
P
A
T
H
W
A
Y
T
O
A
L
O
W
E
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
F
U
T
U
R
E
Scope 1 & 2
Emissions
Scope 3
Emissions
Off-Farm
Our off-farm climate strategy seeks
to decarbonise process heat (the
largest source of which is coal). By
transitioning to alternative energies,
we can leverage our existing assets
and achieve our FY28 target.
Baseline FY20
126,304 tCO
2
e
Baseline FY20
13.05 tCO
2
e
per MT of MS
FY28
(-45%)
FY28
(-30%)
Installation of
electrode boiler
Lead with Pride
TM
greenhouse gas
tool and incentives
Lead with Pride
TM
farming
efficiencies
Deforestation and
land use change
New technologies
(AgriZero
NZ
investment)
Removals (planting
via Whakapuāwai)
Conversion of
boiler to biomass
Biomass conversion
fully operational
Our goal: 45% reduction
of absolute Scope 1 and 2
GHG emissions by 2028
from our 2020 base year
Our goal: 30% reduction
in on-farm GHG emissions
per kilogram of milk solids
by 2028 from our 2020
base year.
Further conversion/
replacement of boiler
We are hereWe are here
On-Farm
Our on-farm climate strategy seeks to
invest in the future of farming solutions
by incentivising our farmers to make
emissions reductions, investing in
technology via AgriZero
NZ
and growing
our Whakapuāwai programme to
achieve our FY28 target.
O
U
R
P
A
T
H
W
A
Y
T
O
A
L
O
W
E
M
I
S
S
I
O
N
S
F
U
T
U
R
E
PAGE 26
CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES FY25
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Risk Management
SECTION THREE
3.1 Climate Risk Assessment Process
How climate-related risks and opportunities are identified, assessed, and managed and how those processes are integrated in existing risk management processes.
Set context
Established a steering committee
and SME group.
Determined:
1. The physical boundary
2. The scope
3. The global warming scenarios
4. Strategic time horizons
5. Key driving forces
Re-established SME group.
Confirmed:
1. The physical boundary
2. The scope
3. The global warming scenarios
4. Strategic time horizons
SME group performed a
qualitative assessment of the
resilience of Synlait’s business
model and strategy.
Risk and opportunity statements
were categorised as either
physical or transition. These
were reviewed by the Steering
Committee, ELT and Board.
SME group reviewed and identified
new physical and transition risks
and opportunities.
The SME group took the
identified risk and opportunities
and applied a rating based on
relevance to Synlait.
The material risks and
opportunities presented in this
document were determined by
risk score.
The SME group took the
identified risk and opportunities
and applied a rating based on
relevance to Synlait.
The material risks and
opportunities presented in this
document were determined by
risk score.
Risk statements were integrated
into the enterprise risk
management process.
Climate-related risks are prioritised
relative to other types of risks by
risk score.
Risk statements were defined,
these were reviewed by the
Steering Committee, ELT and
Board and integrated into the
enterprise risk management
process.
Climate-related risks are prioritised
relative to other types of risks by
risk score.
Material risks and opportunities
will be reviewed annually, further
identification and reassessment
integrated into the Synlait strategy
timeline aligning with the wider
Synlait risk register.
Risk and opportunities monitored
by the ELT and Board at least
quarterly and reported externally
annually.
Risk and opportunities monitored
by the ELT and Board at least
quarterly and reported externally
annually.
Refreshed the scenario narratives
which were then reviewed by the
Steering Committee, ELT and Board.
IdentifyAssessTake action
Monitor,
review, report
Note: This process is aligned to NZ’s National Climate Change Risk Assessment (NCCRA) process and framework as well as the methodology prescribed is ISO 14091.
SME group analysed the driving forces
based on the political, social and
economic context for Synlait.
The scenario narratives were defined,
these were reviewed by the Steering
Committee, ELT and Board.
FY24
FY25
PAGE 27
CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES FY25
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
During 2025, Synlait undertook further
work and research with the help of
external service providers (Deloitte) to
gain a deeper and updated understanding
of our physical and transition risks across
its business and including its owned
assets, leased operations and farm
suppliers in the supply chain (as of
July 2025).
Risks and Opportunities Review
To support this process, we:
• Re-established a group of subject
matter experts (SME) who were best
positioned to provide insight and
commentary on climate risks and
opportunities. These people were a
mix of employees who were new to
the process in FY25 and some who
had been part of the SME group
in FY24.
• Updated our scenarios to capture
material macroeconomic and
geopolitical changes, and to reflect
emerging climate science and any
updates to climate data sets.
• Re-established the scope and
boundary of the climate risk and
opportunities assessment, which did
not change. Scope – Operations
and Assets, On-Farm, and Products
and Markets. Boundary – two tiers
upstream and one tier downstream in
the Synlait value chain. No exclusions
were noted in either the scope or
boundary.
• Utilised our refreshed scenario
narratives to focus our subject
matter experts to review and update
our climate risk assessment for
FY25. This entailed a workshop
to build on previous analysis by
reviewing climate-related risks and
opportunities identified in FY24.
• During the physical risks rating
review process, SMEs were asked
to consider the exposure, sensitivity
and adaptive capacity of Synlait’s
people, operations, and assets, to
the climate hazard. This process
was performed against each time
horizon, and warming scenario.
Transition risks were categorised
in alignment with the Taskforce
on Climate-Related Financial
Disclosures’ (TCFD) transition risk
categories. They were rated using
a modified urgency criteria based
on New Zealand’s National Climate
Change Risk Assessment’s (NCCRA)
and the UK Climate Change Risk
Assessment Technical Report’s
rating methodologies. The process
entailed applying the TCFD’s four risk
categories (market, reputation, policy
and legal, and technology) to identify
the risks arising as the global and
local economies decouple from fossil
fuels; and the TCFD’s five categories
for identifying the opportunities that
present for Synlait as New Zealand
transitions to a decarbonised
economy. These categories include
resource efficiency and cost savings,
the adoption and utilisation of
low-emission energy sources, the
development of new products and
operations, and building supply chain
resilience. The transition risks were
then rated using a modified urgency
criteria derived from the NCCRA
and the UK Committee on Climate
Change’s rating methodologies. The
urgency criteria were modified by
introducing a temporal element to
further define the level of urgency
and provide context for transition risk
rating purposes.
• The outputs from the scenario
analysis were integrated with
Synlait’s wider strategy and risk
management processes. The
company’s standard risk rating tool
was used as part of the process
to ensure climate-related risks are
comparable with other business risks.
• The scenario analysis process
was overseen jointly by the Board
and Executive Leadership Team.
Management lead the process
through workshops and engagement
with subject matter experts, while
the Board and ELT validated the
resulting climate-related risks and
opportunities to ensure appropriate
governance and integration into
strategic decision-making.
• While risks are rated individually,
they are tagged in a way that
enables them to be viewed within the
aggregate. This helps us to identify
if the risks are pervasive across our
business value chain, and which are
therefore more likely to be material.
• The materiality analysis looked at
risks by hazard, type and receptor, to
ensure Synlait has oversight of all the
types of risks that single events can
present for its people, operations and
assets; or all the climate risks that are
associated with parts of the business,
for example, manufacturing.
• The risk assessment process
described above is consistent with
the Ministry for the Environment’s
National Climate Risk Assessment
Framework methodology, and
with ISO14091:2021 by assessing
the identified risks in terms of
their exposure, sensitivity and
adaptive capacity. We adopted
the IPCC Shared Socioeconomic
Pathways (SSPs) for our physical risk
assessment; and the NGFS scenarios
for our Transition risk assessment, as
defined on page 21.
• For a description of the Climate Risk
Assessment Process taken in FY24
please refer to our 2024 Integrated
report which is available on our
website.
Quantitative Risk Modelling Using GIS
We undertook a quantitative climate
risk assessment using GIS to evaluate
the potential physical impacts of climate
change on our assets under different
scenarios. NIWA climate projection data
was mapped against the locations of our
assets (both Synlait owned and our farmer
supply base), incorporating scenario-
specific assumptions and time horizons
to estimate exposure to hazards such
as drought, heat stress, and wind. This
geospatial analysis allowed us to quantify
and visualise physical climate risks,
identify high-risk assets, and inform our
understanding of how these risks could
evolve under each scenario and time
horizon.
3.2 Climate-related Risks and Opportunities Updates in 2025
Synlait’s risk management framework is
aligned to ISO31000:2018 guidelines and
is applied across all sites and operations.
Synlait operates under a Board approved
Risk Management Policy, with supporting
procedures and tools to achieve a
consistent approach.
At Synlait, risk is everyone’s responsibility.
This principle is supported by an
integration of proactive risk management
processes within key business functions
and activities, and reactive incident
management processes where remedial
actions are based on root cause analysis
and robust improvement processes.
The Audit and Risk Committee review
and approve Synlait’s risk management
framework and key control framework.
The Committee is responsible for
monitoring Synlait’s risk management
profile, and the effectiveness of key risk
control activities.
Annually as part of Strategy development
Synlait’s Board and Executive consider
the risks that may have a direct
impact strategy, emerging risks and
interconnectivity of risks. Through these
strategic risk workshops Synlait’s strategic
risks and appetite settings for each risk
are agreed.
Strategic risks are assigned an executive
owner responsible for ensuring mitigation
strategies are in place and robust,
maintaining risks at an acceptable level.
Governance is provided through monthly
individual ELT reviews on the progress
of risk mitigation action plans, monthly
ELT collective reporting and deep dive
sessions on risk mitigation strategies,
quarterly Audit and Risk Committee
reporting and annual Board refresh where
major changes and emerging risks are
discussed.
3.3 Risk Management at Synlait
PAGE 28
CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES FY25
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Organisational boundaries were set
in accordance with the methodology
described in the GHG Protocol. The figure
on the following page shows the context
of the overall structure.
A list of the active entities that have been
included and excluded in our emissions
boundary has been included in our GHG
inventory.
4.2 Boundaries
4.1 Approach
Synlait has been measuring greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions since FY18
making this year our eighth year using
the operational control consolidation
approach. The inventory and this report
have been prepared in accordance with
the requirements of the Greenhouse Gas
Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and
Reporting Standard and the Corporate
Value Chain (Scope 3) Standard.
As adapted from the GHG Protocol, these
emissions were classified under the
following categories:
• Direct GHG emissions (Scope 1):
Emissions from sources that are
owned or controlled by the company.
Metrics and Targets
SECTION FOUR
• Indirect GHG emissions (Scope 2):
Emissions from the generation of
purchased electricity, heat and steam
consumed by the company.
• Indirect GHG emissions (Scope 3):
Emissions that occur because of
the company’s activities but from
sources not owned or controlled by
the company. Our Scope 3 emissions
have been further categorised using
the Scope 3 Standard categories.
Further information is available in our
greenhouse gas inventory in the following
chapter.
One of the planting projects that Synlait's
Whakapuāwai project has supported.
PAGE 29
CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES FY25
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Synlait Dunsandel
• Electricity & transmission and losses
• LPG
• Coal and coal transport
• DAF transport
• Biomass
• Diesel (milk tankers, combi lift, Synlait bus, company vehicles)
• Petrol (company vehicles)
• Packing gas
• Air travel, hotels and rental cars
• Refrigerants
• Waste to landfill
• Outbound, inbound and interwarehouse freight
• Rail freight
• Reimbursed car mileage
• Staff commute
• On-farm
Synlait Pōkeno¹
• Electricity & transmission and losses
• LPG
• Distributed natural gas and transmission losses
• Diesel (milk tankers)
• Packing gas
• Refrigerants
• Waste to landfill
• DAF transport
Synlait Palmerston North Research
and Development Centre
Excluded
Synlait Christchurch
• Electricity & transmission losses
Dairyworks
• Electricity & transmission and losses
• Diesel boiler
• Air travel, hotels, and rental cars
• Packing gas
• Refrigerants
• Waste to landfill
• Outbound, inbound and interwarehouse freight
• Staff commute
Talbot Forest Cheese
Decommissioned
• Electricity & transmission and losses
Synlait Auckland¹
• Electricity & transmission and losses
• Distributed natural gas and transmission losses
• Packing gas
• Refrigerants
• Waste to landfill
Synlait Wiri Warehouse
Includes Jerry Green Street and Westney Road
• Electricity & transmission and losses
• LPG
• Waste to landfill
Synlait China
Excluded
4.3 Inclusion and Exclusions
In FY25 our total GHG emissions
profile included our locations as shown
to the right.
A detailed list of our included locations is
available in our GHG inventory including
any emission sources associated with
each of these locations.
While Synlait takes care to include all
possible emissions sources there are a
limited number of exclusions. Table 10 on
page 41 details emissions that have been
excluded from the inventory in FY25 and
the reason for their exclusion.
Note: business units that have been
excluded in this figure have been
excluded due to data limitations.
¹ These assets are part of the North Island sale.
PAGE 30
CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES FY25
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Synlait has set the following public targets to manage our climate-related risks and opportunities with consideration to
limiting global warming to 1.5°C in line with the Paris Agreement 2016. This target is verified by the Science Based Target
Initiative (SBTi) as aligned with 1.5°C and business ambition for 1.5°C commitment.
4.4 Targets
4.5 Offsets
Synlait is committed to achieving our targets with a primary focus on emission reduction. We have not used offsets to
date, and we do not currently plan to apply offsetting to achieve any of our targets between FY25 and FY28.
4.6 Emission Factors
factor have been used where
spend factors have been required
to be used.
The Global Warming Potential
(GWP) values applied to the
emission factors are consistent with
those used by the Ministry for the
Environment (MfE) in New Zealand’s
Greenhouse Gas Inventory: 1990-
DescriptionUnitBase Year
FY20
Interim
Targets (year)
Target
FY28
Target
Type
Reduce absolute Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions by 45% between
FY20 and FY28
tCO
2
e126,304Nil69,467Absolute
Reduce Scope 3 GHG emissions from on-farm purchased goods and
services by 30% per kg of milk solids (kgMS) between FY20 and FY28
tCO
2
e/t MS13.05Nil9.1 4Intensity
We have a third target that has been committed to through the science-based target initiative (SBTi) that states, “Synlait
commits that 6% of its suppliers by emissions covering off-farm purchased goods and services will have science-based
targets by FY25.”
While we had hoped to report more detailed information on our Scope 3 off-farm emissions this year, data availability has
limited our ability to quantify these emissions. We will be reviewing and resubmitting all our science-based targets during
FY26, and plan to include this supplier-related target as part of that review.
4.7 Currency
Synlait uses the presentation currency of its financial statements as the unit of measure in its climate-related disclosures
which is New Zealand Dollars (NZD).
Emissions factors released by
the New Zealand Ministry for the
Environment (MfE) (published June
2025) are used where available for
all emissions except Christchurch
office electricity and inbound freight
for Synlait. The Market Economics
Limited, 2023, Consumption
Emissions Modelling, report prepared
for Auckland Council (March 2023),
2022 (2025) which uses GWP values
from the IPCC Fifth Assessment
Report (AR5). For full details of the
GWP values and methodologies,
refer to the MfE publication.
We assume data that came from
supplier reports is accurate and
complete, where data from supplier
reports has been used.
PAGE 31
CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES FY25
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Nicky Halley, Synlait Farms Operations Manager
and Andrew Lindsay, Synlait Area Manager.
Metric TypeMetric (unit)TargetFY22FY23FY24FY25Performance Against
Target – Evolution
from Base Year (FY20)
TrendNotes
AbsoluteScope 1 Emissions (tCO
2
e)No Target115,939111,419101,205106,522-9%-
Scope 2 Emissions (tCO
2
e)No Target11,0977,7519,44411,92135%The electricity emissions factor increased by 39% or 0.0282272042 kgCO₂e/unit. If not for the
emissions factor change, total emissions would be 8,475 tCO
2
e.
Scope 1 + 2 Emissions (tCO
2
e)-45%127,036119,170110,649118,442-6%-
Scope 3 Emissions (tCO
2
e)No Target1,106,5831,083,5231,061,716995,992-5%-
IntensityScope 1 and 2 Emissions Per Tonne of Finished Product (tCO
2
e/t)No Target0.620.600.610.52-20%-
Scope 3 On-Farm Emissions Per Tonne of Milk Solids (tCO
2
e/tMS)-30%12.6612.14 12.03 11.29-13%Recalculated from base year in FY25, see GHG inventory on-farm emissions section for
more detail.
Scope 3 On-Farm Emissions Per kg of FPCM (tCO
2
e/kg FPCM) No Target0.98 0.99 0.960.92-8%The emission intensity for farm suppliers included in this report is an average of the total
milk pool. For customers requiring custom emission intensity figures please contact
sustainability@synlait.com
Other
Physical risks: Assets determined to have high or extreme potential
exposure to physical risks from climate hazards (%)
Windy days (>10m/s)
Dry days (<1mm)
Potential Evapotranspiration Deficit (PED)
Very rainy days (>25mm)
Hot days (>25°C)
Very hot days (>30°C)
No Target
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
20%
90%
100%
0%
100%
100%
N/A
These percentages were calculated for the first time using a quantitative analysis (more detail
page 28). The analysis covers all Synlait owned or operated sites and uses downscaled NIWA
data. The results are presented using climate scenario SSP2-4.5 for the 2021–2040 period,
which is considered the most relevant due to its alignment with current planning cycles.
SSP2-4.5 was chosen because it represents a “middle-of-the-road” global pathway with
moderate progress on climate policy and technology.
Vulnerability was identified where assets received High or Extreme exposure ratings.
All assets show some level of exposure across the six physical climate hazards assessed,
ranging from Low to Extreme.
None of our assets were rated High or Extreme for very rainy days (more than 25 mm in
24 hours). However, 70% received a Moderate rating, reflecting the potential for almost one
additional very rainy day per year at our Auckland and North Waikato sites.
Temperature-related risks are the most significant. All assets are rated Extreme for hot days
(25°C), and 70% are rated Extreme for very hot days (30°C). This reflects the potential for
around two additional days per year over 30°C at our Dunsandel factory and farms, or an
increase of almost 10 days per year over 25°C.
Capital deployment: Amount of capital expenditure, financing,
or investment deployed toward climate-related risks and
opportunities ($)
No Target$3,672,104$3,655,641$5,400,614$4,811,013N/AThis amount represents our current spend associated with or already deployed to our
decarbonisation plan, AgriZero
NZ
investment, Whakapuāwai, CRD consulting, SBTi and LWP
GHG incentives during the financial years mentioned.
Remuneration: Management remuneration linked to climate-related
risks and opportunities (%)
No Target0%0%0%0%N/AWe do not currently pay management or our board in relation to climate-related risks and
opportunities.
Internal Emissions Price ($/tCO
2
e)No Target$25$25$45$70N/A-
4.8 Metrics and Targets
Note: Assets and business activities vulnerable to transition risks; and, the amount or percentage of assets, or business activities aligned with climate-related opportunities is yet to be quantified.
PAGE 32
CLIMATE-RELATED DISCLOSURES FY25
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
GHG Emissions
Inventory
CHAPTER THREE
PAGE 33
GHG EMISSIONS INVENTORY
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
1. About This Report 35
GHG Inventory Assurance
Statement of Intent
Base Year and Reporting Period
Targets
2. GHG Inventory Full Results for FY25 36
3. Persons Responsible 37
4. Boundaries 38
Organisational Boundary
Operational Boundary
5. Methodologies and Uncertainties 39
Emissions Source Inclusions, Exclusions Methodologies and Uncertainties
On-Farm Emissions
Emissions Factors
Base Year Recalculation Policy
GHG Information Management and Monitoring Procedures
Other Emissions – HFC, PFC, NF
3
and SF
6
Other Emissions – Biomass
Restatements
6. Glossary 43
7. Sign Off 43
8. Auditors Report 44
FY25 Greenhouse Gas
Inventory Report
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
PAGE 34
GHG EMISSIONS INVENTORY
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Seedlings being raised in
our Whakapuāwai nursery.
This report is the annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions inventory report for
Synlait Milk Limited (Synlait). The inventory is a quantification of the amount of GHG
emissions that can be attributed to Synlait’s operations within the declared boundary,
scope, and reporting period. Synlait is a milk nutrition and dairy processing company
operating in New Zealand.
The inventory and this report have been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Greenhouse Gas Protocol:
A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard and the Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Standard. Throughout this
report, where appropriate, figures have been rounded to the nearest whole number.
GHG Inventory
Assurance
KPMG has been appointed as the
third-party independent assurance
provider. A limited level of assurance
has been given over the Scope 1, 2
and 3 assertions and quantifications
included in this report.
Statement of Intent
and Intended Use
This inventory report forms part of
Synlait’s commitment to sustainability
and environmental best practice
and informs the governance body
and senior management’s decision-
making relating to the company’s
sustainability strategy. We intend to
make this report publicly available
through our website.
This document also provides detail
to support Synlait’s Climate Related
Disclosure (CRD) under the Aotearoa
New Zealand Climate Standards.
Base Year and
Reporting Period
The base year is 1 August 2017 to 31
July 2018. This is the first 12-month
period where GHG emissions were
calculated. This document has been
prepared for the emissions in period 1
August 2024 to 31 July 2025, known
as financial year 25 (FY25).
Targets
In 2021 we set our Science Based
Targets for Scope 1 and 2 emissions
out to 2028. These targets have the
company working toward a reduction
in emissions from the 2020 baseline.
The targets are approved by the
Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi)
and align with the commitment to
keep warming to below 1.5 ̊C.
1. About This Report
Synlait is committed to reduce:
• Absolute Scope 1 and 2
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
by 45% between FY20 and FY28
(in tCO
2
e).
• Scope 3 (in (tCO
2
e)) GHG
emissions from on-farm
purchased goods and services
by 30% per kg of milk solids
(kgMS) intensity between FY20
and FY28.
PAGE 35
GHG EMISSIONS INVENTORY
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Synlait Farmer Leadership Team members from left
Roseanne Megaw, Susie Woodward and Adam Williamson
with Head of Strategy, Milk Supply and Corporate Affairs,
Hannah Lynch (second from left).
Table 1: GHG Emissions by Scope
FY18
(first year)
FY19FY20
(SBTi base year)
FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25FY18-FY25
Evolution
Scope 1 101,079 106,512 117,500116,961115,939111,419101,205 106,5225%
Scope 1 –
Excluding Synlait Farms
101,079 106,512 117,500116,961115,939105,97493,938 98,762-2%
Scope 2 6,923 7,035 8,804 8,504 11,097 7,751 9,44411,921 72%
Scope 2 –
Excluding Synlait Farms
6,9237,0358,8048,50410,9237,5989,290 11,73069%
Scope 1 and 2 Emissions
(tCO₂e)
108,002 113,547 126,304125,465127,036119,170110,649118,44210%
Scope 1 and 2 Emissions
excluding Synlait Farms
(tCO₂e)
108,002 113,547 126,304126,465126,862113,572103,228 110,4912%
Scope 3 Emissions
(tCO₂e)
797,611752,4841,049,3621,140,9131,106,5831,083,5231,061,716995,99225%
Total Emissions
(tCO₂e)
905,613866,0311,175,6661,266,3791,233,6181,202,6931,172,3641,114,43423%
¹ Biomass was combusted in the 2025 financial year for a period of four months.
² On-farm emissions have been restated for all comparative periods to maintain consistency with updated estimation methodology. Refer to the on-farm emissions
disclosures on page 41 for further information. These emissions were first estimated for the FY24 reporting period and previously reported values may be found
in the FY24 GHG Inventory Report.
³ The electricity emissions factor increased by 39% or 0.0282272042 kgCO₂e/unit. If not for emissions factor change, total emissions would be 8,475 tCO₂e.
⁴ The waste to landfill emissions factor decreased by 12% or 0.088947417 kgCO₂e/unit. If not for emissions factor change, total emissions would be 1,098 tCO₂e.
Table 2: GHG Emissions by Source
Emissions SourcesFY18
(first year)
tCO
2
e
FY19
tCO
2
e
FY20
(SBTi base
year) tCO
2
e
FY21
tCO
2
e
FY22
tCO
2
e
FY23
tCO
2
e
FY24
tCO
2
e
FY25
tCO
2
e
Scope 1
LPG470503586531362427463 445
Coal94,791100,02897,96596,40298,46587,253 73,865 80,478
Biomass1--8--2889 82
Diesel – Milk Tankers4,3024,1966,0356,7917,0917,055 6,965 5,715
Diesel – BoilerN/AN/A906982402615-
Distributed Natural Gas16316910,05810,7488,6579,77811,338 10,683
Company Vehicles and Combi 737684243296349310365
Bus-12510512371797675
Packing Gas1,2661,3491,7191,103937819711770
Refrigerants-20-19-11881126
Rental Cars 1446341922 42 2522
Synlait Farms On-Farm2----- 5,4457,267 7,760
Scope 2
Electricity
3
6,9237,0358,8048,50410,9237,5989,29011,730
Synlait Farms Electricity----174153154191
Scope 3
Gas Transmission Losses19201,181639515361422340
Electricity Transmission
Losses
5655336677291,003855689894
Synlait Farms Electricity
Transmission Losses
----16181114
Waste to Landfill44211,1081,6992,0509041,8041,206944
Coal and DAF Transport2122096351,8451,822210224197
Outbound Freight28,413 28,385 30,923 37,98639,726 38,233 23,849 23,023
Inbound Freight11,529 14,248 11,758 12,107 8,96911,52815,222 19,911
Inter-warehouse Freight866 1,361 1,950690746494502698
Rail Freight---59237194220238
Car Mileage49221513241212
Staff Commute----2,9193,922 2,2782,691
Taxi34ExcludedExcludedExcludedExcluded12
Air Travel1,8141,8291,2233353411,486886 829
Hotel Stays150241492034633748
Farmer Suppliers On-Farm
Emissions
2
753,615 704,537 999,2551,084,438 1,049,3381,024,331 1,016,154 946,144
Working From Home Excluded Excluded Excluded Excluded Excluded Excluded 36
Total GHG Emissions905,613866,0311,175,6661,266,3791,233,6181,202,6931,172,3641,114,434
2. GHG Inventory Full Results for FY25
PAGE 36
GHG EMISSIONS INVENTORY
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Table 3: GHG Emissions by Gas Type
Table 4: Emissions Intensity – Total and Per Year
Total – tCO
2
eCO
2
– tCO
2
eCH
4
– tCO
2
eN
2
O – tCO
2
eOtherHFC – tCO
2
e
Scope 1 and 2 Emissions118,442110,1557,773503120
On-Farm Scope 3 Emissions946,14472,933870,1681,6361,4070
Emission Intensity Metrics FY18
tCO
2
e
FY19
tCO
2
e
FY20
tCO
2
e
FY21
tCO
2
e
FY22
tCO
2
e
FY23
tCO
2
e
FY24
tCO
2
e
FY25
tCO
2
e
FY18-FY25
% Change
FY20-FY25
% Change
Scope 1 and 2 Emissions
Per Tonne of Finished Product5
0.78
0.73
0.65
0.58
0.62
0.60
0.61
0.52
-33%
-20%
Scope 3 On-Farm Emissions
Per Tonne of Milk Solids
11.95
11.11
13.05
12.49
12.66
12.14
12.03
11.29
-6%
-13%
Table 5: Scope 3 On-Farm Emissions Per Tonne of Fat and Protein Corrected Milk (FPCM)
FY18
tCO
2
e
FY19
tCO
2
e
FY20
tCO
2
e
FY21
tCO
2
e
FY22
tCO
2
e
FY23
tCO
2
e
FY24
tCO
2
e
FY25
tCO
2
e
FY18-FY25
% Change
Scope 3 On-Farm Emissions
Per Metric Tonne of FPCM
0.92
0.89
1.04
0.98
0.98
0.99
0.96
0.92
0.6%
Table 6: Biomass Combustion
BiomassQuantity (Tonnes)tCO
2
eTonnes Biogenic CO
2
Stationary Combustion2,858824,854
The Board of Directors are responsible for the Greenhouse Gas Inventory
report. This report has been approved by George Adams – Board Chair.
⁵ Finished product(s) is defined as advanced nutrition, ingredients, foodservice, and consumer products in their finished form.
3. Persons Responsible
PAGE 37
GHG EMISSIONS INVENTORY
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Organisational Boundary
Organisational boundaries were set in accordance with the GHG Protocol. The table below details the legal entities included in
scope. Synlait uses an operational control consolidation approach.
Operational Boundary
There are several sites (also referred to as business units) that Synlait operates. The following table outlines the sites that have
been included or excluded in the emissions inventory.
Business Unit/Sites Description/Function LocationInclusionsReason/Notes
Synlait CorporateCorporate emissions across all
Synlait sites.
DunsandelIncludedIncludes emissions which are not site
specific for Synait.
DunsandelMilk processing and
manufacturing site.
DunsandelIncludedIncludes manufacturing and site-specific
emissions only. This is the main operational
and administration site for Synlait.
Dunsandel FarmsDairy farms.DunsandelIncludedSynlait Milk Limited had direct control in
FY25. Includes on-farm and electricity
emissions.
Richard Pearce Drive (RPD)
Auckland
Milk powder canning and
blending site.
AucklandIncludedIncludes manufacturing and site-specific
emissions only.
Westney Road Warehousing.AucklandIncludedLeased premise.
PōkenoMilk processing and
manufacturing site.
WaikatoIncludedIncludes manufacturing and site-specific
emissions only.
Research and Development
Centre
Research and development,
part of a larger shared campus.
Palmerston
North
ExcludedExcluded due to data limitations. Office
space leased and emissions estimated to be
de minimis
ChristchurchSatellite office.ChristchurchIncludedGHG emissions from electricity use is
included only as other data is unable to be
obtained. Office space leased.
Shanghai, ChinaSatellite office.ChinaExcludedExcluded due to data limitations. Office
space leased and emissions estimated to be
de minimis.
Jerry Green StreetWarehousing.AucklandIncludedLeased premise which Synlait
commissioned in late FY23. Included in
scope from FY24.
Dairyworks CorporateCorporate emissions across all
Dairyworks sites (including TFC
and leased warehouse).
ChristchurchIncludedIncludes emissions which are not site
specific for Dairyworks.
Talbot Forest CheeseCheese production factory,
milk supplied by Synlait.
TemukaIncludedIncludes manufacturing and site-specific
emissions only. Non-operational in FY25.
Dairyworks Hornby
Gerald Connolly Place
Dairy processing factory.ChristchurchIncludedIncludes manufacturing and site-specific
emissions only.
Entity Name Description/Function OwnershipInclusionsComment
Synlait Milk LimitedParent company.100%Included-
Synlait Milk Finance
Limited
Wholly owned subsidiary, holding
company for financing purposes.
100%IncludedNo activities that produced GHG
emissions therefore not separately
reported.
Synlait Milk Dunsandel
Farms Limited
Wholly owned subsidiary, two dairy farms
that supply Synlait from FY22
(part season) to FY25.
100%IncludedSynlait has direct operational control,
therefore not separately reported.
The New Zealand Dairy
Company Limited
Wholly owned subsidiary, company that
previously owned the land at Richard
Pearse Drive. The company was acquired
at the same time as land purchase.
100%IncludedNo activities that produced GHG
emissions therefore not separately
reported. Richard Pearce Drive site
captured as a business unit.
Eighty-Nine Richard
Pearse Drive Limited
Wholly owned subsidiary, company that
previously owned the land to Richard
Pearse Drive. The company was acquired
at the same time as land purchase.
100%IncludedNo activities that produced GHG
emissions therefore not separately
reported. Richard Pearce Drive site
captured as a business unit.
Synlait Business Consulting
(Shanghai) Limited
Wholly owned subsidiary, satellite office
for staff based in China.
100%IncludedGHG included from staff commuting only.
Dairyworks Limited and
Dairyworks (Australia)
Pty Limited
Wholly owned subsidiaries, dairy
processing companies in New Zealand
and Australia.
100%IncludedAcquisition (April 2020).
Sichuan New Hope
Nutritional Foods
Infant formula company registered in
China, owns the Akara and E-Akara
brands, which are exclusively
manufactured by Synlait.
25%ExcludedShareholding only, no operational control.
Primary Collaboration
New Zealand Limited
Wholly foreign owned entity designed
to gain a better understanding of the
complex Chinese market and facilitate
easier access to China.
17%ExcludedShareholding only, no operational control.
Centre for Climate ActionAgriZero
NZ
investment.1.5%ExcludedShareholding only, no operational control.
Table 7: Legal EntitiesTable 8: Business Units
4. Boundaries
PAGE 38
GHG EMISSIONS INVENTORY
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
The GHG emissions sources
included in this inventory were
identified in accordance with the
methodology in the GHG Protocol
including the use of the GHG
Protocol Scope 3 standard in the
measurement of emissions.
Emissions factors released by
the New Zealand Ministry for the
Environment (MfE) (published
June 2025) are used where
available for all emissions except
Christchurch office electricity and
inbound freight for Synlait. The
Market Economics Limited, 2023,
Consumption Emissions Modelling
report (prepared for Auckland
Council March 2023) factors have
been used where data is not
available to support activity specific
measurement and spend-based
factors are used.
The Global Warming Potential (GWP)
values applied to the emission
factors are consistent with those
published by the Ministry for the
Environment (MfE) in New Zealand’s
Greenhouse Gas Inventory: 1990-
Table 9: Emissions Source Data Inclusions, Processes and Uncertainties
Emissions
Source
ScopeScope 3
Category
PurposeData ProcessUncertainty
LPG1-ForkliftsUsage provided by supplier reporting in tonnes and
converted to litres.
Low
Coal1-Process heatUsage from invoices combined with the Gross Calorific Value
(GCV) of the coal as assessed from a monthly sample taken
by a third party which serves as a custom emission factor (as
received). As the GCV derived emission factor doesn’t break
down other gases (only total CO2e) it has been assumed that
the percentage of other gases (N20, CH4, CO2) is the same as
the MfE emission factor.
Low
Biomass1-Process heatUsage provided by invoices.Low
Diesel – Milk
Tankers
1-Road transport of
milk from farm to
manufacturing sites,
and transfer of milk
between factories
Usage provided by supplier reporting which tracks diesel use
in litres.
Low
Diesel – Boiler1-Process heatUsage provided by invoices and supplier usage report. Low
Distributed
Natural Gas
1-Process heatMonthly invoices provide consumption data in kWh and GJ.Low
Company
Vehicles and
Combi
1-Business travel and
warehouse operations
Usage of petrol and diesel provided by either invoices or
supplier reports.
Low
Bus1-Employee
transportation
Usage provided by supplier reporting which tracks diesel use
in litres.
Low
Packing Gas1-PackingUsage provided by supplier reporting.Low
Refrigerants1-All units and
systems that use
refrigerants such as air
conditioning, chillers,
fridges
Suppliers confirm whether any top ups have occurred and if
so, provide amount and type of gas.
Low
Rental Cars1-Business travelUsage provided by supplier reporting which includes travel
distances. Travel distances are entered by the rental car
company and are captured in the report from the travel
agent. If distances are coded incorrectly or not entered a
standard measurement of 50km per day of hire is applied
to the booking. The estimation methodology utilised by the
supplier has been approved by Toitū Envirocare.
Low
Synlait Farms
On-Farm
1-Raw milk supply from
farms that Synlait own
and manage
On-farm emissions are GHG emissions from the dairy farms
that Synlait has a direct supply agreement with, and in this
case own and manage. The process for collecting and
reporting this data is the same as for other farmer suppliers.
For more details, please see the on-farm section below.
Low
Electricity 2-Office and
manufacturing use
Usage provided by supplier reporting for all sites except
Christchurch Satellite office which uses spend data from
invoice obtained by building manager and applies an
emission intensity from the Auckland Council Consumption
Emission Modelling report.
Low
2022 (2024). For full details of the
GWP values and methodologies,
refer to the MfE publication.
We assume data that came from
supplier reports is accurate and
complete, where data from supplier
reports has been used.
Where relevant, the inventory is
aligned with industry or sector best
practice for emissions measurement
and reporting. An operational
control consolidation approach is
used to account for emissions.
As adapted from the GHG Protocol,
these emissions were classified
under the following categories:
• Direct GHG emissions (Scope
1): Emissions from sources that
are owned or controlled by the
company.
• Indirect GHG emissions
(Scope 2): Emissions from
the generation of purchased
electricity, heat and steam
consumed by the company.
Emissions Source Inclusions, Exclusions Methodologies and Uncertainties
5. Methodologies and Uncertainties
• Indirect GHG emissions
(Scope 3): Emissions that occur
because of the company’s
activities but from sources
not owned or controlled by
the company. Our Scope 3
emissions have been further
categorised using the Scope 3
Standard categories.
Table 10 provides an overview
of how data was collected for
each GHG emissions and an
explanation of any uncertainties or
assumptions made.
Note: Low uncertainty would
indicate that a supplier invoice,
supplier generated report or
other third party generated report
has been used as the basis of
calculation, medium uncertainty
indicates that internal reports are
the basis of calculation and high
uncertainty indicates a spend
based emission factor has
been used.
PAGE 39
GHG EMISSIONS INVENTORY
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Emissions
Source
ScopeScope 3
Category
PurposeData ProcessUncertainty
Gas and
Electricity
Transmission
Losses
33Losses during
transmission
Default transmission loss amount is used which is incorporated into
the emissions factor provided by MfE and applied to total electricity
and natural gas KWH use as based on supplier reporting.
Low
Waste to Landfill35Manufacturing and
office waste
Usage provided by supplier reporting. The mixed waste non methane
recovery emissions factor is applied to all sites.
Low
Coal Transport34Transportation of coalRoad freight for transporting coal to Dunsandel is estimated
based on weight of coal purchased and distance from supplier to
Dunsandel multiplied by road freight emissions factor. Assuming
26km from supplier to factory.
Medium
DAF Transport34Transportation of
DAF sludge
Usage provided by supplier reporting. Diesel usage in litres based on
average fuel efficiency for each vehicle type.
Low
Outbound
Freight
(Sea, Road, Air)
39Delivery of finished
goods to national
and international
customers
Distances in kilometres are calculated from origin to destination
countries and multiplied by the weight of goods delivered to obtain
tonnes per kilometre (TKM) using data extracted from Synlait’s
internal sales and shipping report to track all orders. Including the
following assumptions:
1. Consignments travel directly to destination.
2. The road components for sea and air freight (from original
location to port and from port to destination) are 50km at each
end unless the carrier is the rail transport provider from Synlait
Dunsandel to Lyttleton Port (the emissions from this carrier are
included in rail freight), making it an estimated 100km of road
freight,
3. Air consignments are >3700km therefore the long-haul
emissions factor is to be used.
4. Where data is unavailable, assumptions are applied based on
available data and knowledge of the customer and/or product.
Medium
Inbound Freight
(Sea, Road, Air)
34Procurement of
ingredients and
packaging materials
Synlait – A spend-based approach has been used to estimate
emissions for Synlait inbound freight, applying appropriate emission
factors to financial expenditure data sourced from our ERP system.
This method was used only for inbound freight movements due to
activity-based data being unavailable and/or incomplete. Emission
factors were primarily sourced from Market Economics Limited
(2023), “Consumption Emissions Modelling,” a report prepared
for Auckland Council (March 2023), and reflect average industry
emission intensities.
This approach introduces some uncertainty due to variations in
supplier-specific emission profiles; however, it provides a reasonable
estimate consistent with the GHG Protocol’s guidance for spend-
based calculations.
Note: This represents a change in method from FY24. For further
detail on the FY24 approach and assumptions, refer to the FY24
Integrated Climate Report (GHG Inventory section).
An action is in place to assess whether this emission source can be
restated using activity-based data from a lower-uncertainty source in
the FY26 reporting cycle.
Dairyworks – Data is based on actuals. Sales reports have been used
to calculate the outbound sea and road freight.
High
(Synlait)
Medium
(Dairyworks)
Emissions
Source
ScopeScope 3
Category
PurposeData ProcessUncertainty
Inter-Warehouse
Freight
(Road and Sea)
34Movement of goods
between sites and
warehousing facilities
Data obtained from Synlait’s ERP system. The total weights moved
between each site are multiplied by the known distance between the
sites to calculate TKM.
Medium
Rail Freight
(Inbound,
Outbound, and
Inter-Warehouse)
34Movement of goods
between Lyttleton port
and Dunsandel
Load weight, in tonnes, is obtained from internal recording via an
excel query and a standard distance in kilometres is applied.
Medium
Reimbursed
Car Mileage
36Staff use of own car
for business travel
Kilometres travelled is calculated from staff mileage claims. Using
emission factor for private car default petrol.
Medium
Staff Commute37Staff travel from home
to work and back
home
Current financial year FTE head count for each site used to
extrapolate on results from a company-wide survey that collected
data on type of vehicle used, distance travelled to most frequent site,
and number of days worked on-site per week. Exclusions include:
• Staff who indicated they travelled by the Synlait provided
bus are excluded from the staff commute totals as diesel is
accounted for already.
• Staff who travelled by air transport were excluded as this is
captured in the air travel emission data as it is booked by our
travel agent. Staff who travelled by company car as these are
included in Scope 1.
Medium
Working
From Home
37Employees working
away from a Synlait or
Dairyworks location
Current financial year FTE head count for Synlait and Dairyworks
used to extrapolate on results from a company-wide survey that
asked how employees got to work or if they worked from home
during the ‘survey week’. The ‘survey week’ refers to a specific
week during the financial year that people were asked to track their
commute patterns. The number of work from home or work remotely
days from the survey week were extrapolated out to a 48 week
working year then default emission factor applied.
Medium
Taxi36Business travelTaxi emissions are associated to Synlait Corporate and Dairyworks
Corporate using ERP extracted data.
Medium
Air Travel
and Hotels
36Business travelThe supplier provides a monthly usage report. The report includes
travel distances and class of travel. Hotel information includes
location and number of nights. The estimation methodology utilised
by the supplier has been approved by Toitū Envirocare.
Low
On-Farm
Emissions
31Supply of raw milkOn-farm emissions are GHG emissions from the dairy farms that
Synlait has a direct supply agreement with, for the purchase of raw
milk. For more details, please see the dedicated section below.
Low
Table 9: Emissions Source Data Inclusions, Processes and Uncertainties (continued)
PAGE 40
GHG EMISSIONS INVENTORY
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Emissions SourcesScopeScope 3 CategoryBusiness unit
Excluded
Exclusion Details
Refrigerants 1-Christchurch Refrigerants have been excluded due to data access issues.
Scope 1.
Purchased Goods
and Services
31AllGHG emissions from non-milk suppliers (for example, packaging,
raw materials, equipment, services) are excluded from the
inventory due to data availability apart from the shipping of these
items which is included.
Capital Goods32AllEmissions from capital assets are excluded due to a lack of
data availability, however emissions from energy consumption
for any construction work or testing of new equipment is
included.
Downstream
Transportation
and Distribution
39AllFreight activities not paid for by Synlait have been included in
Category 4, as all inbound and outbound freight activities are
captured under this category. It is not feasible to differentiate
the contractual agreements for each consignment to separate
freight paid or not paid for by Synlait. Freight movement beyond
destination warehouse (i.e., distribution centre, retailer and/or end
customer) is not included due to lack of data and likely to be de
minimis. To-date we have been unable to collect outbound courier
data from suppliers. Most courier items are estimated to be less
than 2kg, therefore are considered de minimis.
Processing of
Sold Products
310AllOur ingredients are used by customers to manufacture a wide
range of end products. Estimating our proportional share
of customers’ processing-related GHG emissions would be
technically complex and highly uncertain due to the diversity
of products and processes involved. This includes raw milk
supplied from the North Island, which is currently contracted
to Synlait. The milk is collected by a third party and sold at the
time of collection for processing by that party, after which it is
marketed as their own product.
Use of Sold Products311AllWe have carried Life Cycle Analyses for four of our key products
and in all cases GHG emissions from consumer use represented
less than 2.4% of total emissions.
End-of-Life Treatment
of Sold Products
312AllWe have carried Life Cycle Analyses for four of our key products
and in all cases GHG emissions from consumer disposal
represented less than 0.3% of total emissions.
Downstream
Leased Assets
313N/ASynlait does not operate this type of lease therefore it has
been excluded.
Franchises314N/ASynlait does not operate franchises therefore it has been
excluded.
Waste to Landfill35ChristchurchSynlait leases one level of a seven-level building where all the
waste is collected and disposed of collectively by the building
manager. It is therefore difficult to obtain accurate data for
Synlait’s portion.
Investments315N/AUnable to quantify due to data availability.
On-Farm Emission factor: On-
farm emissions calculated using
the New Zealand Bioeconomy
Science Institute (NZBSI) (formerly
AgResearch) LCA method follow the
methodology of the New Zealand’s
Greenhouse Gas Inventory and
emission factors sourced from the
international ecoinvent database
that have been adapted as much
as possible to the NZ situation. The
GWP100 values used is AR6 (2021).
Quantification of GHG type: Each
source of GHG data, broken down
by type of GHG, is also provided
by NZBSI. This enables Synlait to
calculate the average proportion of
CO2, CH4 and N2O gases within total
GHG emissions across all dairy farms.
Custom Emission Factor(s): Unless
otherwise stated the emission
intensity for farm suppliers included
in this report are an average of
the total milk pool. For customers
needing an emissions factor for
reporting that is representative of
your purchasing please contact
sustainability@synlait.com
Farms Reported: On-farm emissions
are GHG emissions from the dairy
farms that have an existing supplier
contract with Synlait during the
reporting period, for the supply of
raw milk.
Data Process/Uncertainties: On-
farm emissions are gathered from
every farm that Synlait had a supply
agreement with during the season.
The resulting document is called
a nutrient budget. The process for
turning a farms nutrient budget into
our on-farm data is as follows:
1. Synlait staff and contractors
check the data is complete and
accurate.
2. Farm data (nutrient budget) is
entered into OVERSEER® by the
farm manager with the help of
Synlait Sustainability Advisors
and/or contracted consultants.
For more information on what is
included in the nutrient budget
and feeds into OVERSEER®, refer
to the on-farm Boundary section
below. OVERSEER® data output
will be used for resource consent
compliance purpose in FY25.
3. In FY24 for the first time we
have engaged AgResearch (as
they were known at the time),
New Zealand’s Leading agri-
based science innovation crown
research institute, to take the
input data that has previously
been modelled in OVERSEER®
and model using their LCA
method. This change was to
ensure the data aligns with the
International Dairy Federation’s
2022 Carbon Footprint Standard
for the dairy sector. In FY25 we
engaged them again to complete
this work. Note: AgResearch is
now a group of the New Zealand
Bioeconomy Science Institute.
4. Where data is not available for a
farm (for example, it has ceased
to supply Synlait or data not
available by our internal cut-off
date), data may be manually
entered, or previous years
data used. All care is taken
to ensure that all farms with a
current supply agreement are
represented in our on-farm
emissions.
5. Exclusions are removed, if
relevant, (see list of exclusions
below).
6. Emissions from farms that supply
Synlait, and other processors
are adjusted in accordance
with the percentage of supply
they give us. For example, if a
farm supplies 20% of its milk to
Synlait and 80% of its milk to
another processor, Synlait will
take 20% of the total emissions
for this farm.
7. Farms are weighted by milk
supplied, then emissions, and
emissions intensities calculated.
On-Farm Data Boundary: The LCA
method calculates emissions based
on inputs.
The following inputs are included to
determine overall tonnes of carbon
equivalent.
• Enteric fermentation
• Dung deposited
• Imported effluent
• Animal dry matter
• Crop residue
• Burning of crop residues
• Nitrogen in excreta deposited
Table 10: Emission ExclusionsOn-Farm Emissions
PAGE 41
GHG EMISSIONS INVENTORY
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Air conditioning units and chillers
contain HFCs. The Dunsandel site
has reported top-ups of gas for this
reporting period, HFC for the top up
has been included in the inventory.
Air conditioning is excluded from the
inventory for the Christchurch office
only, due to data availability. There
are no operations that use PFC, NF3
or SF6.
• Nitrogen added
• Nitrogen leached and volatilised
from urine and fertiliser
• Electricity
• Fuel
• Animal transport
• Young stock
• Animals wintered off farm
• Deforestation
• Peat soils
Exclusions:
• New farmer suppliers who come
on after 31 May of the reporting
year are excluded as they
would have only supplied milk
to Synlait for one month or less
prior to the end of financial year.
• Emissions from agricultural
products or dairy products
purchased from other suppliers
for processing (with whom there
is no direct supply agreement)
are also excluded.
• Rearing beef animals
On-Farm Emissions
(continued)
Base Year
Recalculation Policy
Other Emissions –
HFC, PFC, NF3 and SF6
Base year data may need to be
revised when material changes occur
and have an impact on calculated
emissions. Our policy is to recalculate
base year data and indicate in a
footnote any recalculation or re-
statement of previously disclosed
data, in any of the following situations:
• Changes are estimated to
represent more than 5% of Scope
1, 2 or 3 emissions: or
• There are significant changes to
our reporting or organisational
boundaries, including the
outsourcing or insourcing of
emitting activities, mergers,
acquisitions, or divestures: or
• There are significant changes in
our calculation: or
• We discover significant errors,
or cumulative errors that are
collectively significant, in our
previous disclosures: or
• Annually for our on-farm GHG
data. Past disclosures can be
found in our previous GHG
Inventory reports at synlait.com/
sustainability.
• Continuous improvements
to model information and
methodologies in this emerging
scientific area and enabling valid
period comparisons.
GHG emissions are measured
annually and compared against
the base year. Each source of
GHG emissions is managed by a
spreadsheet which includes raw
data and calculated GHG emissions.
A master spreadsheet performs the
consolidation of all GHG emissions
at group level. This document also
provides an overview of boundaries
and scopes, data collection
processes and GHG measurement
methodologies for each emission
source and is updated each year.
Synlait’s GHG Emissions Inventory
Report, associated documents and
spreadsheets are prepared by the
sustainability team. They are then
reviewed internally and by external
third parties as required.
GHG Information
Management and
Monitoring Procedures
3078 tonnes of wood pellets were
combusted during FY25. The CH4
(39tCO2e) and N2O (50tCO2e)
emissions have been included in the
inventory. The biogenic carbon (not
included in the inventory) associated
with the combustion of biomass is
5230 tCO2.
Other Emissions –
Biomass
The following emission sources have
been restated since our last GHG
inventory (FY24):
• On-Farm Emissions: Base year
emissions have been restated
this year which is an annual
occurrence due to a change in
calculation methodology which
impacts the calculation of our
on-farm Scope 3 emissions only.
See our On-Farm Emissions
data process and Base Year
Recalculation Policy for more
details. For more information
on emission data that were
previously reported please
refer to copies of previous GHG
inventories.
Restatements
PAGE 42
GHG EMISSIONS INVENTORY
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
TermDefinitionAdditional Information (if required)
APIApplication Programming InterfaceAn API establishes an online connection between a data provider and an
end-user.
Biogenic CO₂The carbon dioxide (CO₂) resulting
from the decomposition, digestion or
combustion of biomass
Produced because of biomass (wood pellet) energy to power boilers at
Synlait.
CH₄Methane-
CO₂Carbon Dioxide-
DAFDissolved Air FlotationDAF refers to the treatment of dairy wastewater using Dissolved Air
Flotation. The solids that remain after the wastewater has been treated are
then transported to their disposal location.
DWDairyworks-
Emissions-Any reference to ‘emissions’ in this report means greenhouse gas emissions.
FPCMFat and Protein Corrected MilkCan also be known as Energy Corrected Milk (ECM), is the calculation of
standardising milk production for comparison between cows.
FYFinancial Year This inventory is prepared for financial year 2025 also known as FY25
(1 August 2024 - 31 July 2025).
GHGGreenhouse Gas Emissions-
IDFInternational Dairy FederationInternational Dairy Federation’s 2022 Carbon Footprint Standard for the
dairy sector A standard that connects and aligns the whole dairy value chain
around sustainability criteria.
LCALife Cycle Assessment The systematic analysis of the potential environmental impacts of products
or services during their entire life cycle.
LPGLiquid Petroleum GasFuel for forklifts in Dunsandel.
MfENew Zealand Ministry for the
Environment
Current government organisation responsible for emission factors in New
Zealand.
N₂ONitrous Oxide -
NZBSINew Zealand Bioeconomy Science
Institute
The Bioeconomy Science Institute is an amalgamation of AgResearch,
Manaaki Whenua – Landcare Research, Plant & Food Research and Scion,
previously separate crown entities. This change occurred during the 2025
financial year.
RPDRichard Pearse DriveSynlait site at 89 Richard Pearse Drive.
SML/SYNSynlait Milk LimitedReporting Entity.
TFCTalbot Forest CheeseDairyworks site that is not currently in operation.
TKMTonnes per Kilometre-
Table 11: Glossary of Terms
Person Responsible: George Adams, Board ChairFrequency of Report:Annual
Dated:28 November 2025 Base Year:2017-2018
6. Glossary 7. Sign Off
While all care has been taken to remove acronyms and abbreviations some have been
included in this report for length. Any acronyms and abbreviations used or other concepts
which may need explanation have been included in table 11.
PAGE 43
GHG EMISSIONS INVENTORY
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
© 2025 KPMG, a New Zealand Partnership and a member firm of the KPMG global organization of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Limited,
a private English company limited by guarantee. All rights reserved.
Document classification: KPMG Public
Independent Limited Assurance
Report to Synlait Milk Limited
Conclusion
Our limited assurance conclusion has been formed on the basis of the matters outlined in this report.
Based on our limited assurance engagement, which is not a reasonable assurance engagement or an audit,
nothing has come to our attention that would lead us to believe that, in all material respects, the scope 1, 2
and 3 gross greenhouse gas emissions, additional required disclosures of scope 1, 2 and 3 gross greenhouse
gas emissions and scope 1, 2 and 3 gross greenhouse gas emissions methods, assumptions and estimation
uncertainty disclosures included in the Integrated Climate Report (GHG disclosures) are not fairly presented
and prepared in accordance with the Aotearoa New Zealand Climate Standards (NZ CSs) issued by the
External Reporting Board (the criteria) for the period 1 August 2024 to 31 July 2025.
Information subject to assurance
We have performed an engagement to provide limited assurance in relation to Synlait Milk Limited’s
GHG disclosures for the period 1 August 2024 to 31 July 2025.
Below are the locations of the GHG disclosures subject to assurance:
NZ CS 1-3 requirement GHG Disclosures reference
NZ CS 1 22(a) Page 32: Absolute scope 1, 2, 1 + 2, and 3 emissions
Page 36: Table 1 and Table 2
NZ CS 1 24 (a) Page 29
NZ CS 1 24 (b) Pages 29 and 38
NZ CS 1 24 (c) Page 31: Section 4.6
Page 41: On-farm emission factor
NZ CS 1 24 (d) Page 41: Table 10
Page 42
NZ CS 3 52 Pages 39 & 40: Table 9
Pages 41 & 42: On-Farm Emissions
NZ CS 3 53 Pages 39 & 40: Table 9
Pages 41 & 42: On-Farm Emissions
NZ CS 3 54 Page 42: Restatements
Our conclusion on the GHG disclosures does not extend to any other information included, or referred to, in the
Integrated Climate Report or other information that accompanies or contains the Integrated Climate Report and
our assurance report] (other information). We have not performed any procedures with respect to the other
information.
Criteria
The criteria used as the basis of reporting include the NZ CSs. As disclosed on pages 29 and 35 of the
Integrated Climate Report the greenhouse gas emissions have been measured in accordance with the
Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard and the Greenhouse Gas
Protocol: Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard. As a result, this report may not
be suitable for another purpose.
Standards we followed
We conducted our limited assurance engagement in accordance with New Zealand Standard on Assurance
Engagements 1 (NZ SAE 1) A ssurance Engagements over Greenhouse Gas Emissions Disclosures and
International Standard on Assurance Engagements (New Zealand) 3410 Assurance Engagements on
Greenhouse Gas Statements (ISAE (NZ) 3410) issued by the New Zealand Auditing and Assurance Standards
Board (Standard). We believe that the evidence we have obtained is s ufficient and appropriate to provide a
basis for our conclusion.
Our responsibilities under the Standard are further described in the ‘Our responsibility’ section of our report.
Key Matters
Key matters are those matters that, in our professional judgment, were of most significance in undertaking our
assurance engagement over the GHG disclosures for the period 1 August 2024 to 31 July 2025.
Our procedures were undertaken in the context of and solely for the purpose of our assurance conclusion on
the GHG disclosures and we did n ot reach a separate assurance conclusion on each individual key matter.
Key Matter Procedures to address the Key Matter
On-farm emissions (scope 1 and 3)
Refer to pages 41 and 42 of the
integrated climate report.
On-farm emissions represent the
largest single source of Synlait’s
greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions. These emissions arise
from Synlait owned farms and
dairy farms supplying raw milk to
Synlait under direct supply
agreements and include complex
sources such as enteric
fermentation, nitrogen leaching,
fertiliser use, deforestation, and
peat soils.
The significance of this matter
stems from:
•Materiality: The sheer
volume and proportion
of emissions make this a
critical area for
assurance.
Our assurance procedures included:
•We assessed the appropriateness of the AgResearch LCA model
used for quantifying on-farm emissions, including its alignment with
the GHG Protocol. We considered the model’s scope, assumptions,
and emission factors.
•We examined the consistency of calculations across farms and the
application of proportional allocation for farms supplying multiple
processors.
•We considered the rationale for changes in the AgResearch LCA
methodology year on year and.
•We assessed Synlait’s internal controls over GHG data management,
including the role of sustainability advisors and consultants in data
collection and validation.
•We assessed Synlait’s current year on farm emissions based on the
movement in fat and protein corrected milk volumes from prior year.
Findings:
We have completed our procedures and have no matters to report.
PAGE 44
CLIMATEāRELATED DISCLOSURES FY25
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Key Matter Procedures to address the Key Matter
•Complexity and
Estimation Uncertainty:
Emissions are
calculated using a Life
Cycle Assessment
(LCA) model developed
by AgResearch, which
incorporates multiple
assumptions, emission
factors, and farm-level
data inputs.
•Data Collection
Challenges: Emissions
are derived from nutrient
budgets submitted by
farms, with some data
manually entered or
estimated.
Other Matter – Prior year comparatives assured by another
practitioner
The Scope 1 and 2 emission GHG Disclosures (excluding Synlait on-farm emissions) for the year ended 31 July
2024, were subject to a reasonable assurance engagement by another practitioner whose report dated 25
November 2024 expressed an unmodified opinion on such information.
The Scope 3 emission GHG Disclosures (excluding on-farm emissions) for the year ended 31 July 2024 were
subject to a limited assurance engagement by another practitioner whose report dated 25 November 2024
expressed an unmodified conclusion on such information.
Neither we, nor the predecessor practitioner, were engaged to express a conclusion over, or apply any
procedures, on the revision of the on-farm emissions for the year ended 31 July 2024, that are described in
Table 2 on page 36 and, accordingly, we do not express a conclusion or any other form of assurance about
whether such revisions are appropriate and have been properly applied.
Our conclusion is not modified with respect to this matter.
How to interpret limited assurance and material misstatement
A limited assurance engagement is substantially less in scope than a reasonable assurance engagement in
relation to both the risk assessment procedures, including an understanding of internal control, and the
procedures performed in response to the assessed risks.
Misstatements, including omissions, within the GHG disclosures are considered material if, individually or in t he
aggregate, they could reasonably be expected to influence the relevant decisions of the intended users taken on
the basis of the GHG disclosures.
Inherent limitations
As noted in the GHG disclosures on page 39, GHG quantification is s ubject to inherent uncertainty because of
incomplete scientific knowledge used to determine emission factors and the values needed to combine
emissions of different gases.
Use of this assurance report
Our report is made solely for Synlait Milk Limited. Our assurance work has been undertaken so that we might
state to Synlait Milk Limited those matters we are required to state to them in the assurance report and for no
other purpose.
Our report should not be regarded as suitable to be used or relied on by anyone other than Synlait Milk
Limited for any purpose or in any context. Any other person who obtains access to our report or a copy
thereof and chooses to rely on our r eport (or any part thereof) will do so at its own risk.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, none of KPMG, any entities directly or indirectly controlled by KPMG, or
any of their respective members or employees accept or assume any responsibility and deny all l iability to
anyone other than Synlait Milk Limited for our work, for this independent assurance report, and/or for the
opinions or conclusions we have reached.
Our conclusion is not modified in respect of this matter.
Synlait Milk Limited’s responsibility for the GHG disclosures
The Directors of Synlait Milk Limited are responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of the GHG
disclosures in accordance with the criteria. This responsibility includes the design, implementation and
maintenance of such internal control as Directors determine is relevant to enable the preparation of the GHG
disclosures that are free from material misstatement whether due to fraud or error.
The Directors of Synlait Milk Limited are also responsible for selecting or de
veloping suitable criteria for
preparing the GHG disclosures and appropriately referring to or describing the criteria used.
Our responsibility
We have responsibility for:
•planning and performing the engagement to obtain limited assurance about whether the GHG
disclosures are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error;
•forming an independent conclusion based on the procedures we have performed and the evidence we
have obtained; and
•reporting our conclusion to Synlait Milk Limited.
Our work was carried out by a multidisciplinary team, including specialists in environmental science, who
assisted with the scope 1 and 3 on farm emissions. We remain solely responsible for assurance conclusion.
Summary of the work we performed as the basis for our conclusion
A limited assurance engagement performed in accordance with the Standard involves assessing the suitability
in the circumstances of Synlait Milk Limited’s use of the criteria as the basis for the preparation of the GHG
disclosures, assessing the risks of material misstatement of the GHG disclosures whether due to fraud or error,
responding to the assessed risks as necessary in the circumstances, and evaluating the overall presentation of
the GHG disclosures.
PAGE 45
CLIMATEāRELATED DISCLOSURES FY25
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
We exercised professional judgment and maintained professional scepticism throughout the engagement. We
designed and performed our procedures to obtain evidence about the GHG disclosures that is sufficient and
appropriate to provide a basis for our conclusion.
Our procedures selected depended on the understanding of the GHG disclosures that is sufficient and
appropriate to provide a basis for our conclusion. The procedures we performed were based on our professional
judgment and included inquiries, observation of processes performed, inspection of documents, analytical
procedures, evaluating the appropriateness of quantification methods and reporting policies, and agreeing or
reconciling with underlying records.
In undertaking limited assurance on the GHG disclosures the procedures we primarily performed were:
•obtained, through inquiries, an understanding of the Company’s control environment, processes and
information systems relevant to the preparation of the GHG disclosures. We did not evaluate the design
of particular control activities, or obtain evidence about their implementation;
•evaluated whether the Company’s methods for developing estimates are appropriate and had been
consistently applied. Our procedures did not include testing the data on which the estimates are based
or separately developing our own estimates against which to evaluate the Company’s estimates;
•undertook site visits at the Company’s manufacturing site to assess the completeness of the emissions
sources, data collection methods, source data and relevant assumptions applicable to the sites;
•tested, at each site visited, a limited number of relevant emissions sources to supporting records, as
appropriate;
•performed analytical procedures on particular emission categories by comparing the expected GHGs
emitted to actual GHGs emitted and made inquiries of management to obtain explanations for any
significant differences we identified; and
•considered the presentation and disclosure of the GHG disclosures against the NZ CS disclosure
requirements.
The procedures performed in a limited assurance engagement vary in nature and timing from, and are less in
extent than for a reasonable assurance engagement. Consequently, the level of assurance obtained in a limited
assurance engagement is s ubstantially lower than the assurance that would have been obtained had a
reasonable assurance engagement been performed.
Our independence and quality management
This assurance engagement was undertaken in accordance with NZ SAE 1. NZ S AE 1 is founded on the
fundamental principles of independence, integrity, objectivity, professional competence and due care,
confidentiality and professional behaviour.
We have complied with the independence and other ethical requirements of Professional and Ethical Standard 1
International Code of Ethics for Assurance Practitioners (including International Independence Standards) ( New
Zealand) (PES 1) i ssued by the New Zealand Auditing and Assurance Standards Board, which is f ounded on
fundamental principles of integrity, objectivity, professional competence and due care, confidentiality and
professional behaviour.
The firm applies Professional and Ethical Standard 3 Quality Management for Firms that Perform Audits or
Reviews of Financial Statements, or Other Assurance or Related Services Engagements (PES 3), which
requires the firm to design, implement and operate a system of quality control including policies or procedures
regarding compliance with ethical requirements, professional standards and applicable legal and regulatory
requirements.
We have also complied with Professional and Ethical Standard 4 Engagement Quality Reviews (PES 4) which
deals with the appointment and eligibility of the engagement quality reviewer and the engagement quality
reviewer’s responsibilities relating to the performance and documentation of
an engagement quality review.
Our firm has also provided financial audit services to Synlait Milk Limited. Subject to certain restrictions, partners
and employees of our firm may also deal with Synlait Milk Limited on normal terms within the ordinary course of
trading activities of the business of Synlait Milk Limited. These matters have not impaired our independence as
assurance providers of Synlait Milk Limited for this engagement. The firm has no other relationship with, or
interest in, Synlait Milk Limited.
As we are engaged to form an independent conclusion on the GHG disclosures prepared by Synlait Milk Limited,
we are not permitted to be involved in the preparation of the GHG disclosures as doing so may compromise our
independence.
The engagement partner on the assurance engagement resulting in this independent assurance report is Ian
Proudfoot.
KPMG
Auckland
28 November 2025
PAGE 46
CLIMATEāRELATED DISCLOSURES FY25
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Appendices
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025PAGE 47
APPENDICES
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
Description of MetricUnitFY18FY19FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25
Total Energy ConsumptionMWh 347,145377,086446,541436,365428,104420,391297,858417,542
Energy per Tonne of Product kWh/MT Prod2,4952,4252,3132,0312,0762,0771,6111,652
Total Coal ConsumptionMT54,13756,80756,88956,46756,68641,94935,31539,948
Coal Consumption per Tonne of Product MT0.390.370.290.260.260.210.190.17
Total Waste (Landfilled + Recycled) Produced MT4,2965,2498,2426,7447,0997,3437,8279,795
Water Recovered and Reused in Manufacturing Operations (Pōkeno Only)%--17%27%19%14%15%11%
Total Off-Farm Water Consumption (Excluding Synlait Farms)m³1,927,4842,232,8692,823,4542,636,2472,678,3092,925,5933,107,1853,007,350
Total Waste (Landfilled + Recycled) Per Tonne of ProductKg/MT Prod3134433134364239
B Corp™ Points – Group#-----89.589.589.5
B Corp™ Points – Dairyworks¹#-----56.656.656.6
B Corp™ Points – Synlait#--80.480.480.497.797.797.7
Engagement Ratio – Synlait²#3.75:13.58:15.20:15.30:14.90:15.70:14.02:15.10:1
Engagement Ratio – Dairyworks³#------3.42:18.00:1
Total Employees – All#-----1,4171,4231,395
Total Employees – Synlait#-----1,1491,1331,106
Total Employees – Dairyworks (as at 31 July)#-----268290289
Supplier Expenditure with New Zealand Registered Companies⁴%86.30%88.40%86.80%--86.80%85.50%83.20%
Employee Turnover Rate – Synlait%18%10%13%14%23%18%16%15%
Employee Turnover Rate – Dairyworks (as at 31 July)%---48%34%28%15%16%
Employee Fatalities #00000000
Appendix 1: Key Sustainability Metrics
¹ Dairyworks were first certified in FY23.
² Engagement Ratio – Engagement Ratio is engaged staff:actively disengaged staff (excluding Synlait China and Dairyworks) this figure is from our February 2025 survey.
³ Survey conducted August 2025.
⁴ Excluding Milk Suppliers.
PAGE 48
APPENDICES
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
SectionLocation in ReportReferenceDisclosure Requirements
NZ CS 1.7(a)Identity of governance body
NZ CS 1.7(b)Governance body’s oversight
NZ CS 1.7(c)Management’s roles
NZ CS 1.8(a)Informing the governance body
NZ CS 1.8(b)Governance body’s skills and competence
NZ CS 1.8(c)Implementation of the entity’s strategy
NZ CS 1.8(d)Setting, monitoring and overseeing metrics and targets and remuneration policies
NZ CS 1.9(a)Management-level responsibility and how they engage with the governance body
NZ CS 1.9(b)Management-level organisational structure
NZ CS 1.9(c)Management-level information, decisions and monitoring
NZ CS 1.11(a)Current climate-related impacts
NZ CS 1.11(b)Description of scenario analysis
NZ CS 1.11(c)Climate-related risks and opportunities over the short, medium, and long term
NZ CS 1.11(d)Anticipated impacts of climate-related risks and opportunities
NZ CS 1.11(e)How Synlait will position itself as the global and domestic economy transitions towards
a low-emissions, climate-resilient future state
NZ CS 1.12(a)Current physical and transition impacts
NZ CS 1.12(b) (c)Current financial impacts of physical and transition impacts
NZ CS 1.13Scenario analysis
NZ CS 1.14(a)Definition of short, medium and long term and how the definitions are linked to its
strategic planning horizons and capital deployment plans
NZ CS 1.14(b)Classification of climate-related risks and opportunities
NZ CS 1.14 (c)How climate-related risks and opportunities serve as an input to its internal capital
deployment and funding decision-making processes
NZ CS 1.15 (a)Anticipated impacts
NZ CS 1.15 (b)Anticipated financial impacts
NZ CS 1.15 (c) 9d)Time horizons
NZ CS 1.16(a)Business model and strategy
NZ CS 1.16(b)Transition plan
NZ CS 1.16(c)Transition plan alignment with internal capital deployment and funding
decision-making processes
NZ CS 1.18(a)Identifying, assessing and managing climate-related risks
NZ CS 1.18(b)Integrating climate-related risks into risk management processes
NZ CS 1.19(a)Tools and methods
NZ CS 1.19(b)Short, medium and long term time horizons
NZ CS 1.19(c)Value chain exclusions
NZ CS 1.19(d)Frequency of assessment
NZ CS 1.19(e)Prioritising climate-related risks
NZ CS 1.21(a)Metrics
NZ CS 1.21(b)Industry-based metrics
NZ CS 1.21(c)Other KPI
NZ CS 1.21(d)Targets
NZ CS 1.22 (a)(i)-(iii)GHG emissions (Gross)
NZ CS 1.22 (b)GHG emissions (Intensity)
NZ CS 1.22 (c)Transition risks
NZ CS 1.22 (d)Physical risks
NZ CS 2
Reference
Adoption ProvisionAdoption Provision
Applied
Additional Disclosure
Information
Adoption provision 1: Current financial impacts
10Paragraph 12(b) of NZ CS 1 requires disclosure of the current financial
impacts of an entity's physical and transition impacts identified in
paragraph 12(a).
NoInformation disclosed
11If an entity elects to use the adoption provision in paragraph 10,
then there is also an exemption from paragraph 12(c) of NZ CS 1
(requirement to disclose an exemption of why an entity is unable to
disclose quantitative information for paragraph 12(b) if that is the case).
No-
Adoption provision 2: Anticipated financial impacts
12Paragraph 15(b) of NZ CS 1 requires disclosure of the anticipated
financial impacts of climate-related risks and opportunities reasonably
expected by the entity.
Ye s The financial cost anticipated from
these impacts is currently being
calculated and understood – we
plan to provide an update in our
FY25 disclosure
13If an entity elects to use the adoption provision in paragraph 12,
then there is also an exemption from paragraph 15(c) of NZ CS 1
(requirement to provide a description of the time horizons over
which the anticipated financial impacts of climate-related risks and
opportunities could reasonably be expected to occur).
Ye sThe financial cost anticipated from
these impacts is currently being
calculated and understood – we
plan to provide an update in our
FY25 disclosure
14If an entity elects to use the adoption provision in paragraph 12,
then there is also an exemption from paragraph 15(d) of NZ CS 1
(requirement to provide an explanation of why an entity is unable to
disclose quantitative information for paragraph 15(b), if that is the case).
Ye s-
Adoption provision 3: Transition planning
15Paragraphs 16(b) and 16(c) of NZ CS 1 require disclosure of the
transition plan aspects of the strategy and the extent to which they are
aligned with internal capital deployment and funding decision-making
processes.
NoTransition plan published on
page 26
Adoption provision 4: Scope 3 GHG emissions
17Paragraph 22(a)(ii) of NZ CS 1 requires disclosure of greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions (gross emissions in metric tonnes of carbon dioxide
equivalent (CO₂e) classified as Scope 3. This may be applied to all its
Scope 3 GHG emissions sources, or a selected subset of its Scope 3
GHG emissions sources.
NoAll in boundary Scope 3 emissions
provided exclusions noted in the
GHG Inventory Report
Adoption provision 5: Comparatives for Scope 3 GHG emissions
18Paragraph 40 of NZ CS 3 requires disclosure of comparative
information for the immediately preceding two reporting periods for
each metric disclosed in the current reporting period.
NoComparative information provided
Adoption provision 6: Comparatives for metrics
20Paragraph 40 of NZ CS 3 requires disclosure of comparative
information for the immediately preceding two reporting periods for
each metric disclosed in the current reporting period.
NoComparative information provided
Adoption provision 7: Analysis of trends
22Paragraph 42 of NZ CS 3 requires an analysis of the main trends
evident from a comparison of each metric from previous reporting
periods to the current reporting period to be disclosed.
NoEvolution and trend provided
Governance
Strategy
Risk Management
Metrics and Targets
Pages 16-19
Pages 20-26
Pages 27-29
Pages 29-32
Appendix 2: Climate-Related Disclosure IndexAppendix 3: Climate-Related Disclosure Adoption Provisions
PAGE 49
APPENDICES
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
The Orderly scenario describes a future where global warming is contained within 1.5°C. Through
decisive, multilateral, implementation of effective and ambitious decarbonisation targets and
policies, emissions steadily decrease and achieve net zero by 2050. This scenario assumes a
moderate level of transition risk and lower exposure to physical risks compared to the Disorderly
and Hothouse scenarios.
Political stability and strong policy frameworks reward investment into low and zero carbon
technology, providing a stable investment environment. The government introduces methane
pricing to address agricultural emissions and lays out a clear, fixed path for reducing NZU
allocations. This results in a carbon price trajectory of $284 (US$2010/GJ) by 2030 and $709
(US$2010/GJ) by 2050.
Financial market regulation, and the introduction of New Zealand’s green investment taxonomy,
makes it difficult for capital to be allocated to high-emission, low-resilience practices and
enterprises. Globally, the private sector develops and adopts zero emission technologies faster than
expected, inducing a rapid shift on the supply side. Technological advancements drive efficiency
and scale output through improved climate resilient farming tools, technologies and practices.
Revenue from the methane levy is recycled in the form of investments to support farmers in their
efforts to reduce emissions. Economic growth is steadily decoupling from fossil fuels and installed
renewable energy generating capacity is scaled up to meet increasing demand.
Following a period of early and decisive climate policy commitments, international governments
successively unwind climate legislation. Resulting investor uncertainty leads to delayed emissions
reduction, hindering the international transition to a low-carbon economy. The introduction of
carbon border adjustment mechanisms is stalled until 2030, and key high emitting markets continue
to be exempted from regulated carbon emissions trading schemes. Inconsistent policy frameworks
delay an effective climate change response until 2027, when a sudden, reactive, and costly
intervention on climate change results in a spike in the shadow carbon price. This scenario presents
the highest level of transition risks exposure, and moderate- to- high physical climate risks exposure.
In New Zealand, lobbying by farmers and other advocacy groups drives division among political
parties, resulting in policy uncertainty and a weakened legislative framework. A pervasive, low level
of climate literacy and on-going political division over climate action leads to a disconnect between
regional government agencies and advocacy groups, hampering efforts to adopt a cohesive
approach to climate-resilient infrastructure upgrades, land use planning, and natural resource
management. Domestic climate legislation is softened by the introduction of higher thresholds for
compliance eligibility, and delays on key disclosure requirements including Scope 3 emissions.
This serves to reduce the number of mandated reporting entities, and delays supply chain
decarbonization. This reduces the quality of climate-related and other on-financial disclosures, and
New Zealand exporters struggle to retain access to key export markets and to retain contracts with
major overseas buyers.
Fragmented research and development incentives, and lack of incentives through fiscal policies,
result in low adoption of regenerative farming practices. Intermittent government intervention
Artificial intelligence provides further opportunities to enhance efficiency and reduce emissions.
Strong government leadership and a robust policy framework ensures optimal allocation of
land use and water consents, balancing competing demand for housing, food security, energy
security and carbon sequestration.
Carbon border adjustment mechanisms have been introduced and the IMO Net-zero
Framework implements emission limits and GHG pricing levy on shipping which embeds
carbon miles into transport costs. This further incentivises decarbonisation of the agricultural
sector, and international trade agreements carry market exclusion for high emissions goods and
services.
There is widespread social consensus on the need for climate action. Consumer demand
for sustainable dairy produce is high, and tolerance for unsustainable farming and business
practice is low. Sustainable agriculture trends are driven by innovations in precision agriculture,
the rise of AI and data-driven farming and breakthroughs in ag biotechnology. Litigation results
in compensation payouts, and obligations on farmers and corporate entities to remediate
environmental damage to land and waterways. Consumers in export markets demand green
credentials and farmers benefit from price premiums. There is deep understanding and
education among the public about the role of agriculture in New Zealand’s economy, and there
is widespread acknowledgement and support of the progress farmers are making.
and failure to include methane in the Emissions Trading Scheme, results in depressed carbon
prices. Additionally, the farm-level reporting and pricing system intended to address agriculture
emissions has been postponed. This erodes incentive for the agricultural sector to rapidly
decarbonise. Financial market regulation is in place to encourage capital flows to low emissions
activities; however, low monitoring and compliance enables farmers to access discounted
finance for nominal sustainable farming improvements.
A series of extreme weather events in 2027, triggered by accelerated global warming, leads to
a sudden shift in local and international governments’ response to climate. A slew of legislation
and punitive fiscal policies aimed at heavy emitters, sees a reallocation of capital into clean
tech and zero carbon infrastructure. The high-cost carbon liability of New Zealand’s Nationally
Determined Contribution prompts the government to implement a stringent mitigation pathway
and adopts a penalties-based approach to decarbonisation of the agricultural sector, leveraging
the Resource Management Act.
Competing land use demand for housing, agriculture and energy, coupled with delays in
addressing agricultural sector emissions, results in escalating tensions between urban and rural
communities. Litigation escalates, forcing farmers and developers to remediate environmental
damage to land and waterways. By 2030, a rapid shift in climate policies sees a sharp surge in
carbon prices which triggers a sudden rise in capital costs for high emitting sectors. There is a
wave of financial instability as asset values adjust abruptly, resulting in a disorderly adoption of
low emissions farming technologies and practices. For farmers, this drives up prices and, results
in a flattening of the milk curve, impacting farmers’ bottom line.
Orderly
• Network for Greening the Financial System (NGFS) –
Net Zero and Highway to Paris
• IPCC AR5, AR6 – SSP1-RCP1.9
• Climate Change Commision – Tailwinds
• Agriculture Sector Climate Change Scenarios –
Tū-ā-pae, Stance in order, step in succession
Regional policy
variation
Medium
variation
Policy
reaction
Immediate and
smooth
Policy
ambition
1.4 ̊C
Technology
change
Fast
change
CDR
(CO₂ removal)
Medium-high
use
Appendix 4: Full Scenario Narratives
Disorderly
• NGFS – Delayed Transition and Sudden Wake-up Call
• IPCC AR5, AR6 – SSP1-RCP2.6
• Climate Change Commission – Headwinds
• Agriculture Sector Climate Change Scenarios –
Tū-ā-hopo, Misstep
Regional policy
variation
High
variation
Policy
reaction
Delayed
Policy
ambition
1.8 ̊C
Technology
change
Slow/fast
change
CDR
(CO₂ removal)
Low-medium
use
PAGE 50
APPENDICES
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Hot House World
• NGFS – Current Policies and Disasters and Policy Stagnation
• IPCC AR5, AR6 – SSP5-RCP8.5
• Climate Change Commision – Current Policies
• Agriculture Sector Climate Change Scenarios –
Tū-ā-tapape, Faltered step, to fall
Regional policy
variation
Low
variation
Policy
reaction
Delayed
Policy
ambition
3 ̊C+
Technology
change
Slow
change
CDR
(CO₂ removal)
Low use
The Hot House scenario describes a future where policies designed to curb emissions are largely
absent. The result is that the rapid accumulation of greenhouse gases in the earth’s atmosphere
leads to global surface temperatures in exceedance of 3°Celsius. This scenario presents low
exposure to transition risks, and extreme exposure physical climate risks.
Policies to address emissions and climate change have remained largely unchanged since the
mid-2020s, resulting in missed emissions reduction targets. The rapid increase in marine surface
temperatures has a significant impact on weather systems, with extreme storms and droughts
becoming increasingly commonplace. Global average temperatures breach the 1.5 degrees Celsius
goal by 2027 and continues to rise. Compound extreme weather events (drought, heatwave,
wildfire, flood and storm events) constrain supply, leading to inflationary pressures stemming
from higher production costs and resource scarcity. Frequent supply shocks render the milk pool
vulnerable to price volatility.
By 2040, unregulated and uncontrolled competition for land begins to escalate, favouring the
best economic return for the land with little regard for sustainability. Large tranches of land are
being purchased by large corporates for economic gain resulting in industrialised farming. Food
safety quality standards are relaxed due to frequent climate-related supply shocks. The regulatory
framework is oriented to support trade for nutrient-dense foods such as dairy. Carbon border
adjustment mechanisms have been dismantled to allow free flow of goods across borders,
with the most powerful economies and the highest bidders securing access to scarce food
resources.
Atlantic Meridonial Overturning Circulation (AMOC) collapse is imminent, threatening significant
changes in weather patterns, extreme temperature shifts, rising sea level, disruption to marine
ecosystems and reduced oceanic carbon dioxide uptake. At 2040, New Zealand farmers
are experiencing an average of 86% increase in hot days above 30 degrees Celsius and the
physical impacts of the changing climate reduce dairy production levels significantly.
By 2040, the ETS scheme has completely collapsed. No government regulation exists
to manage capital allocation, and therefore capital flows with little to no oversight of
environmental, social, governance or emissions reduction performance. Consumers are forced
to make decisions based solely on price without consideration for wider ESG impacts. Open
borders and a constant flow of climate refugees provides abundant cheap labour. This provides
little incentive for farm owners to improve labour rights, work conditions, nor to improve land
stewardship and animal husbandry. High prices, poor product quality, worsening environmental
degradation, land scarcity and water scarcity, generate a public backlash against the agricultural
sector; industrial farm owners are painted as environmental criminals.
Appendix 4: Full Scenario Narratives (continued)
PAGE 51
APPENDICES
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
TermDefinition
A and RBoard subcommittee – Audit and Risk Committee.
Adaptive capacityAdjustment to actual or expected climate change and its effects. In human systems, adaptation seeks to
moderate or avoid harm, or to take opportunities. Intervention may facilitate adjustment (IPCC, 2014).
APIApplication Programming Interface.
Climate riskThe interplay between hazards, exposure and vulnerability (IPCC, 2014).
DAFDissolved Air Flotation.
DESNZUnited Kingdom Department for Energy Security and Net Zero.
DUNSynlait Dunsandel.
DWDairyworks.
ExposureLack of protection, where people, livelihoods, species or ecosystems, environmental functions, operations
and resources, infrastructure or economic, social or cultural assets in places and settings could be adversely
affected by a change in external stresses that a system is exposed to. In the context of climate change, these
are normally specific climate and biophysical variables (IPCC, 2007).
FPCMFat and Protein Corrected Milk.
GCM annual timeseriesTime horizons are estimated as annual time series from 2020 to 2100 for monthly average and maximum
wind speed and as annual timeseries from 2020 to 2099 for maximum 1-day and maximum 5-day
precipitation amounts.
GCM single yearsFor storm surge there are two future periods, namely ‘2050’ that represents the 2046 to 2055 period and
‘2100’ that represents the 2090 to 2100 period. Time horizons for cyclones are estimated for when each
scenario reaches a 2-degree warming state, which is around 2050 for RCP4.5 and around 2040 for RCP8.5.
GHGGreenhouse Gas Emissions.
HazardThe potential occurrence of a natural or human-induced physical event or trend or physical impact that
may cause loss of life, injury, or other health impacts, as well as damage and loss to property, infrastructure,
livelihoods, service provision, ecosystems and environmental resources (IPCC, 2014).
IPCCIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – A scientific and intergovernmental body under the auspices of
the United Nations.
LPGLiquid Petroleum Gas.
MfENew Zealand Ministry for the Environment.
NZ CSAotearoa New Zealand Climate Standards.
Paris Agreement 2016An agreement within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, dealing with
greenhouse-gas-emissions mitigation, adaptation, and finance, signed in 2016.
PEGBoard subcommittee – People, Environment and Governance Committee.
POKSynlait Pōkeno.
Potential Evapotranspiration
Deficit (PED)
The difference between how much moisture the atmosphere could absorb and how much it can currently
absorb.
RCM annual timeseriesTime horizons for all metrics are estimated as annual timeseries from 2020 to 2100.
RCP Representative Concentration Pathway for Emissions – Modelled trajectories of global anthropogenic
emissions over the 21
st
century are termed emission pathways. Scenarios that include time series of
emissions and concentrations of the full suite of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and aerosols and chemically
active gases, as well as land use/land cover. The word representative signifies that each RCP provides only
one of many possible scenarios that would lead to the specific radiative forcing characteristics. The term
pathway emphasizes the fact that not only the long-term concentration levels but also the trajectory taken
over time to reach that outcome are of interest. RCPs were used to develop climate projections in CMIP5.
RCP2.6: One pathway where radiative forcing peaks at approximately 3 W m-2 and then declines to be
limited at 2.6 W m-2 in 2100 (the corresponding Extended Concentration Pathway, or ECP, has constant
emissions after 2100). RCP4.5 and RCP6.0: Two intermediate stabilization pathways in which radiative
forcing is limited at approximately 4.5 W m-2 and 6.0 W m-2 in 2100 (the corresponding ECPs have constant
concentrations after 2150). RCP8.5: One high pathway which leads to >8.5 W m-2 in 2100 (the corresponding
ECP has constant emissions after 2100 until 2150 and constant concentrations after 2250).
TermDefinition
Risk AreaSignificant operational focus areas under which risks are categorised.
Risk ReceptorThe person, asset or service impacted by the presenting climate hazard.
Risk StatementDescribes the consequence of the presenting climate hazard on the receptor.
Risk TypeHigh level risk impact categories.
RPDRichard Pearse Drive.
Sea level rise decadal
timeseries
Time horizons are estimated as median 10-year periods relative to the (1995-2014) baseline. The 10-year
projections are provided around a central year, such that the projection for ‘2030’ represents the 2025 to
2034 period. The historical baseline period is the final ten years of the historical period (1995-2014) simulated
by all climate models before the SSPs are applied from 2015 onwards. For example, the baseline period
‘2010’ represents the 2005 to 2014 period.
SensitivityThe degree to which a system is affected, either adversely or beneficially, by climate-related stimuli
(IPCC, 2014).
SSPShared socio-economic pathway – Shared Socio-economic Pathways were developed to complement the
RCPs with varying socio-economic challenges to adaptation and mitigation. Based on five narratives, the
SSPs describe alternative socio-economic futures in the absence of climate policy intervention, comprising
sustainable development (SSP1), regional rivalry (SSP3), in equality (SSP4), fossil–fuelled development (SSP5)
and middle-of-the-road development (SSP2). The combination of SSP-based socio-economic scenarios and
Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP)-based climate projections provides an integrative frame for
climate impactand policy analysis.
SYNSynlait.
TFCTalbot Forest Cheese.
Value chainThe full range of activities, resources and relationships related to an entity’s business model and the external
environment in which it operates. A value chain encompasses the activities, resources and relationships an
entity uses and relies on to create its products or operations from conception to delivery, consumption and
end of life. Relevant activities, resources and relationships include those in an entity’s operations, such as
human resource; those along its supply, marketing and distribution channels, such as materials and service
sourcing and product and service sale and delivery; and the financing, geographical, geopolitical and
regulatory environments in which an entity operates. (XRB NZCS1).
VulnerabilityThe propensity or predisposition to be adversely affected. Encompasses a variety of concepts including
sensitivity/susceptibility to harm, and lack of capacity to cope and adapt (IPCC, 2014).
XRBExternal Reporting Board.
Appendix 5: Glossary of Terms
PAGE 52
APPENDICES
SYNLAIT MILK LIMITED
INTEGRATED CLIMATE REPORT 2025
Data sourced from publicly available filings. Our datasets may not be complete. Automated analysis can produce errors. If you believe any data on this page is incorrect, please contact us at hello@nzxplorer.co.nz. For informational purposes only. Not investment advice.