Skip to main content
CarbonMeld CarbonMeld Carbon Observatory
Tools
EN
ScoredACRLivestock Waste ManagementIDAHO, USRegistry: TerminatedGeneral Methodologyv2.1

Big Sky Dairy

Developer: Camco Offsets I, LLC

ACR-190 ↗

#1277of 1294 in Industrial#1458of 1661 in United States#784of 934 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 2.5 / 10 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%.

Analysis

Big Sky Dairy is an ACR-registered livestock waste management (biogas flare) project in Idaho with four material findings in its verification report, including failure to monitor hourly flare operation and unresolved gas-analyzer QA/QC non-conformances. Nearly all critical design parameters — baseline method, additionality test, leakage treatment, and safeguards — are absent from the extracted record, and the low extraction confidence compounds the evidence gap. The project presents significant over-crediting and data-reliability risks.

Red Flags

5 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

Unlock the full analysis

Per-dimension scores, risk indicators, 5 red flags, score factors, detailed analysis, and 17 registry documents (17 analyzed).

€9+ VAT · 30-day pass · one-time, no auto-renewal

Every rated project, PDF reports, API access, portfolio alerts and per-dimension scores with red-flag details in side-by-side comparisons for 30 days (public-data comparison is free; fair use: 30 projects per day).

Price + VAT · By paying you accept the Terms of Use — digital content, no refunds. How Premium works

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
19,17900
2014
24,55800
2015
23,61000
2016
22,07100
2017
24,83500
2018
24,53500
2019
25,68200
2020
29,68100
Total194,15100

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].

Profile & governance

Analysis ProvenanceGeneral Methodologyv2.1

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 →