Skip to content

Interactive tool

The Reclaim Index: what your pallet habit actually weighs.

Set your volume, footprint and frequency. The Index converts it into carbon avoided, weight diverted, lumber spared and money not spent — using coefficients we publish in full so you can argue with them.
Warehouse aisle lined on both sides with tall stacks of used wood pallets on a polished concrete floor, roof lights overhead
Inside the buildingThe sort aisle at half past seven. Graded stock on the left, waiting to be worked on the right.

Turn a number into a quote

Once you have a figure you like, this is where it becomes an order. Put the volume from the calculator into the quantity field.

  • Written quotes, usually inside one business day
  • Loads from 100 pallets to full 53' trailers
  • We buy as readily as we sell — tell us which way it flows

We reply by email, so this needs to be a working address.

US or Canadian 10-digit number. Formats itself as you type.

Two-letter code or full name.

US ZIP (43217) or Canadian postal code (K1A 0B1).

Whole units, digits only.

No phone number required from us — we quote by email so you have the numbers in writing.

Warehouse interior with pallets sorted by type — natural wood, blue pooled units, black plastic and EPAL stamped stacks

Segregation

Sorted by type, not by convenience. Pooled units go back to the pool; plastic runs a separate stream entirely.

The Reclaim Index

What does your pallet habit actually weigh?

Move the numbers. We’ll show what choosing reclaimed wood over freshly milled lumber does across a year.

255,000
Pallet footprint
How often

That’s 9,000 pallets over twelve months.

138.6

metric tons

CO₂e avoided

202.5

short tons

Kept out of landfill

831

trees

Standing timber spared

$85,500

per year

Not spent on new wood

216,000

board feet

Lumber not milled

385,000

car miles

Equivalent driving avoided

How we calculate this →

We built this because we kept being asked for “the sustainability numbers” and kept being uncomfortable with the way most companies answer that question — a single impressive figure with no assumptions attached, which is not information.

The Index takes the opposite approach. Everything it computes is a simple multiplication of your volume by a stated coefficient, and every coefficient is listed with its basis and our confidence in it on the methodology page. If you disagree with one of them, you can work out exactly how much the answer changes.

The most uncertain number in the whole thing is trees spared, because board feet per tree varies enormously with species, age and stand quality. We use 260 board feet, which is mid-range for a mature hardwood sawlog. Treat that output as an illustration rather than an inventory.

Questions

About the Index.

What is the counterfactual?

Buying new wood pallets of the same footprint. The figures represent the difference between choosing recycled and choosing new — not against no pallets at all, which would be meaningless.

Does it account for the emissions of recycling?

Yes. The avoided-emissions figure is net: roughly 16.6 kg CO₂e for a new 48×40 minus about 1.2 kg for the collection, sorting and repair of a recycled one, giving the 15.4 kg the calculator uses.

Can I use these figures in a public report?

You can, provided you describe them as modelled estimates and cite the methodology. If you need figures that will survive an audit, use your actual weight tickets and diversion statements instead — see the zero-waste promise.

Why does the cost saving look so large?

Because the price gap between recycled and new pallets is large — roughly $9.50 a unit for a 48×40 in 2025. On 500 pallets a month that is $57,000 a year, which surprises people, and is the main reason recycled stock dominates the market.

Where does the driving comparison come from?

0.36 kg CO₂e per passenger-vehicle mile, a commonly used average. It is there for intuition, not for reporting — the underlying CO₂e figure is the one to use.

What it deliberately excludes

End-of-life emissions, transport to your site, and any claim about carbon stored in the wood itself. Including storage would inflate the numbers considerably and would be difficult to defend, since the carbon in a pallet is released whenever it eventually decomposes or burns.

If you want to be stricter

Halve the trees figure and treat the CO₂e number as ±30%. The conclusion does not change: reuse is roughly an order of magnitude better than new manufacture, and no reasonable adjustment to these coefficients closes that gap.

Keep reading