CarbonMeld CarbonMeld Carbon Observatory
Tools
ProjectsDevelopersComparePortfolioCCP trackerA–Z index BuyersCORSIA supplyCheck an offerAPI & MCP Method About the System Editorial Policy Score Your Project
EN
Workbench ProjectsDevelopersComparePortfolioCCP trackerA–Z index
← All projects
ScoredCARLivestock - ARB ComplianceUTAH, USRegistry: Crediting endedGeneral Methodologyv2.1

Blue Mountain Biogas

Developer: 3Degrees Group, Inc

CAR-997 ↗

#313of 377 in Biogas#1264of 1692 in United States#712of 883 in Climate Action Reserve (CAR)

Crediting ended

The crediting period has ended. Credits already issued exist; no new ones will be issued unless the crediting period is renewed.

Climate Action Reserve: “Completed”

Assessment

CarbonMeld document-based assessment

01020304 Overall 3.8 / 10
Integrity 🔒 Transparency 🔒 Claim Safety 🔒 Documentation 🔒
Dimension scores are locked — the faint arcs are empty tracks, not zero scores.

Scale 0–10 · method weights: integrity 35% · transparency 25% · claim safety 25% · documentation 15%.

Scored2026-09-17medium confidenceLatest verified monitoring: 2021-04-15

evidence:19/19registry documents analyzed · 3red flags

Generated by CarbonMeld Analysis Pipeline · Methodology · Editorial Policy · About the System
Download Report (PDF)

Analysis

Blue Mountain Biogas is a long-running CAR-registered livestock biogas project in Utah with a named VVB and a specified methodology, but the extracted record is remarkably sparse on additionality, baseline, and leakage parameters. The most serious concern is a 91% gap between the project's own monitoring report (53,121 tCO₂e) and the VVB-verified figure (4,570 tCO₂e) for the same period, compounded by material findings on flow-meter accuracy and data gaps. The project's integrity and claim-safety profiles are weakened by these data-reliability issues, even though the VVB process ultimately constrained issuance to the verified number.

Red Flags

3 red flags detected — Unlock with Premium

Findings

Risk Indicators

Additionality

🔒

Permanence

🔒

Leakage

🔒

Baseline

🔒

Safeguards

🔒

Double-claim

🔒

Risk indicator details are a Premium feature

Score Breakdown

Score factors per dimension are a Premium feature — Unlock with Premium

Detailed Analysis

The detailed per-dimension analysis is a Premium feature — Unlock with Premium

Evidence

Eligibility & market

What can you claim with this credit?

Four checks buyers ask about, from the registry and the Integrity Council (ICVCM).

  • Airlines (CORSIA)

    No CORSIA label on the registry

    Not usable for airlines' CORSIA obligations.

    Source: registry label

  • Integrity label (ICVCM CCP)

    No ICVCM information

    No CCP label and no ICVCM decision found for this project's methodology.

  • Removal or reduction

    Emission reduction or avoidance

    Prevents or reduces emissions — fits contribution claims, not SBTi neutralisation.

    Source: project sector

  • Paris Agreement (Article 6)

    No Article 6 authorization

    No corresponding adjustment: the host country can also count this reduction towards its own target.

    Source: registry label

Information only, from public sources. Claim rules (CORSIA, SBTi, EU rules on green claims) change: check them before making a public claim. Since 27 September 2026, EU consumer rules do not allow “climate neutral” product claims based on offsets.

Registry labels last checked:2026-09-27

Credit Vintages Exhausted

IssuedRetiredAvailable
2013
24,64300
2014
62,22300
2015
50,26400
2016
33,53600
2017
21,60300
2019
55300
2020
2,59900
2021
4,57000
Total199,99100

Where to buy

Got an offer for these credits? Check it against the registry →

+ Know where to buy this?

Listing multiple projects? Send us a CSV at [email protected].

⚑ Dispute this rating

Profile & governance

Analysis ProvenanceGeneral Methodologyv2.1
Methodology·Editorial Policy·About the System

Are you the project owner?

Metadata correction (free)

Name, country, marketplace or links incorrect? Let us know.

Does not modify the score.

[email protected] →

Contest this rating

Something wrong in the analysis, or a registry document we have not used? Send us the link to the public source: you get a reference and an answer within 30 days.

Contest this rating →