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
ScoredACRLivestock Waste ManagementWISCONSIN, USRegistry: TerminatedGeneral Methodologyv2.1

Statz B Farm Anaerobic Digester

Developer: 3Degrees Group, Inc

ACR-323 ↗

#1055of 1605 in Industrial#990of 1692 in United States#514of 958 in American Carbon Registry (ACR)

Red flagTerminated

The project was ended by the registry or the developer (terminated, cancelled or not delivered). No new credits will be issued.

Only the vintages issued before the change (below) exist on the registry. Verify any resale claim against those vintages.

American Carbon Registry: “TERMINATED”

Assessment

CarbonMeld document-based assessment

01020304 Overall 4.6 / 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%.

Scored2026-09-13medium confidenceLatest verified monitoring: 2018-06-30

evidence:6/6registry documents analyzed · 4red flags

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

Analysis

The Statz B Farm anaerobic digester project operates under a standardized ACR livestock protocol and is verified by SES, Inc., but the available documentation reveals significant gaps: no additionality test type or VVB confirmation is recorded, no baseline method or leakage treatment is stated, and five material findings flag monitoring-equipment calibration and inspection deficiencies. The project is a technology-based methane-capture operation with no carbon-stock reversal risk, but the absence of corrective actions despite those findings and the lack of ex-ante lifetime estimates limit confidence in the credit claims.

Red Flags

4 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
2017
20,00900
2018
15,22600
Total35,23500

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 →