I started LifeCycle IQ because I kept watching good companies get stuck between two bad options.

A quick carbon calculator could give them a number in an afternoon, but it fell apart the moment a customer, an investor, or a regulator asked how it was built. A full ISO-compliant study held up under scrutiny, but it cost fifty to a hundred thousand dollars and took months, often long after the material or supplier decision it was meant to inform had already been made.

Neither option matched how these decisions actually get made. Product and supply chain choices happen continuously, across dozens of materials and suppliers, usually with a cost number from one team and a sustainability number from another. Nobody had built a tool that kept up with that pace while still holding up to real scrutiny.

That is what LifeCycle IQ is. It is not a report you commission once and file away. It is a model built to ISO 14040 and 14044 standards that stays live as your suppliers and materials change, with cost data and sustainability data in the same place, because in our experience they were never really separate numbers to begin with.

We built it for the people who have to make the material or supplier call and then defend it, on both cost and sustainability grounds, often before all the data is perfect. That defensibility, delivered fast enough to actually inform the decision, is the whole point.

If that is the position you are in, I would like to hear about it.