Igloo Cellulose Inc.

Integrity

The project is tagged to the Puro.earth Bio-based Construction Materials methodology, but the extracted record does not state the additionality test used or whether additionality was confirmed by the VVB (verification report dated 2022-12-31 referenced). The baseline method and any baseline reassessment timing are not stated in available documents, and leakage deduction/justification are also not found in the extracted record. No material findings or corrective actions are recorded in the verification report record, which is a positive signal but not sufficient to compensate for missing core integrity parameters.

Transparency

A verifier is named (bio.inspecta AG) and a verification report date is provided (2022-12-31), which supports basic traceability. However, the monitoring period is not stated in the extracted record, and neither claimed nor verified removals (ERR) are available, preventing an external reader from checking MRV outcomes. The evidence document is listed as unknown and extraction confidence is low, further reducing transparency and auditability.

Claim Safety

Because the extracted record lacks claimed and verified ERR values, it is not possible to assess whether issuance aligns with measured outcomes or to check for discrepancies that often signal over-crediting risk. Baseline and leakage information are not stated in available documents, which are central to assessing whether removals are conservatively quantified under an alternative materials approach. CORSIA eligibility and CCP status are not stated in the extracted record, leaving uncertainty about how credits might be marketed and the associated greenwashing risk.

Documentation

Although three documents were used and a verification report is referenced, the evidence document list is effectively non-specific (listed as unknown). Minimum extraction confidence is low, indicating at least one key document was poorly readable, which undermines confidence that missing fields are truly absent rather than unreadable. Key items typically expected in verification/monitoring documentation (monitoring period, quantified results, safeguards/grievance details) are not captured in the extracted record.

Overall

No contradictions were identified in the extracted record, so there is no need to privilege one document value over another. The main driver of the low overall score is the breadth of evidence gaps on additionality, baseline, leakage, permanence provisions, and quantified verified removals, combined with low extraction confidence. Note: under the stated gate rules, a documentation score below 3.0 would cap transparency after scoring.