A labelled lot is the only way primary scope 3 data travels from a smallholder's meter into a buyer's inventory file. That single sentence is the commercial reason this category exists.
Three things decide whether a footprint is evidence or decoration: the boundary you draw, how much of it is metered rather than estimated, and whether the baseline was co-signed before the improvement happened. Everything below follows from those three.
| Line item | Typical share | Where the number comes from |
|---|---|---|
| Electricity | 61.5% | Hourly meter × marginal grid factor for that hour |
| Embedded hardware | 17.9% | Capital cost amortised over 3 years, allocated per plantlet |
| Outbound transport | 10.3% | Distance × mode × load factor, not a flat average |
| Packaging | 6.2% | Material mass × published factor |
| Nutrients | 4.2% | Mass applied × production factor |
Cradle to gate, with the functional unit fixed at one delivered plantlet. Gate is chosen over farm-gate because the buyer's claim starts when the tray arrives, and transport is usually 10% of the total — small enough to be honest, large enough to matter.
Capital equipment is the contested part. A carbon box, a pump and a sensor set are bought once and used for years, so their carbon is amortised over the asset life and allocated to every plantlet that passes through. We publish the amortisation period because changing it from three years to five moves the result by about four percentage points.
| Grade | Metered share | Sampling | What you must supply |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | ≥ 70% | 15-minute intervals | Calibrated meter certificates, 12 months of readings |
| B | ≥ 45% | Hourly intervals | Meter readings plus purchase invoices for the gaps |
| C | below 45% | Daily or invoice-based | Invoices only — the result is indicative, not bankable |
The grade is not a quality opinion. It is arithmetic: the share of the total that traceably came from a measured quantity. A grade C label still has value internally; it just cannot carry a buyer-facing reduction claim.
| Stage | Days | From you | You get |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scope | 2 | Site list, boundary question | Signed scope note |
| Document review | 3 | Meter records, factor sources, allocation policy | Findings log |
| Verification | 2 | Site access or remote ledger access | Sample test results |
| Technical review | 3 | Nothing | Statement plus label records |
A nursery producing 240,000 plantlets annually in 480-plantlet batches. At 0.195 kgCO₂e per delivered plantlet the annual footprint is about 46.8 tonnes; the batch total is 93.6 kg. That farm issues 500 labels a year, each carrying its own hash and registry entry.
| Item | Value | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Functional unit | 1 plantlet (45 d nursery, delivered) | declared once, never redefined |
| Per-unit footprint | 0.195 kgCO₂e | grade B, 61.5% metered |
| Batch total | 93.6 kgCO₂e | 480 plantlets |
| Label review fee | ¥40 per batch | verifier share of the buyer's ¥60 |
| Annual label revenue | ¥20,000 | 500 batches × ¥40 |
Yes, but the result is a grade C review of invoices, not a verified footprint. The label wording changes accordingly and we say so on the record.
Electricity is 61.5% of the total and the daily spread in grid intensity is 87%, so scheduling the fog pump moves the number more than buying a better pump.
No. We verify the carbon claim only. Coffee quality grading is a different discipline with different liabilities.