GHG Protocol aligned · EPA Supply Chain GHG Factors v1.3 · eGRID 2023 · 🇺🇸 US spend data

Board-ready carbon reports
for SMBs.

Upload a CSV from QuickBooks, Xero, NetSuite, or SAP. We classify every vendor to an EPA commodity code, apply the current emission factor, and return a GHG-Protocol-aligned Scope 1, 2, and 3 report, disclosure-aligned for CDP, CSRD, or a supplier portal. In under five minutes.

Generate a draft · from $20 Read the specimen
Frameworks
GHG · CDP · CSRD
Accuracy
±25-40% Scope 3
Turnaround
< 5 min
Drop a CSV here: classify it live.
Runs in your browser · nothing leaves this tab · try the sample data
awaiting csv
Idle

#Vendor · ledgerUSD

EPA

#Scope · categorykg CO₂e

Total spend
$0USD
Total emissions
0kg CO₂e
Frameworks supported
GHG ProtocolUS EPA USEEIOCDPCSRD / ESRSCalifornia SB-253
The engine

A transaction, transmuted.

Each line of your general ledger maps to an EPA USEEIO commodity code. Each code carries a published emission factor in kg CO₂e per dollar. We do the mapping, apply the factor, and return a ledger of emissions next to your ledger of spend. Hover any row to pair the two sides. Click any number to see the methodology.
#Vendor · General LedgerUSD
01PG&E · Natural Gasutilities$9,180.00
02Shell · Fleet Dieselfuel$2,420.00
03PG&E · Electricityutilities$14,650.00
04Amazon AWScloud$3,290.00
05Delta Air Linestravel$1,204.00
06FedEx Freightlogistics$612.00
07Staples · Officesupplies$210.00
ΣTotal · Q3 2024$31,566.00
=
USEEIO
v2.2
#Scope · Categorykg CO₂e
01Stationary combustionS148,746
02Mobile combustionS16,365
03Purchased electricityS210,255
04Cloud servicesS3.1365
05Business travelS3.6775
06Upstream logisticsS3.4364
07Purchased goodsS3.123
ΣTotal · Q3 2024120,647
Atlas

The rate of exchange.

Every carbon number on every report traces to one of these factors, published by the US EPA, the IPCC, or a subregional grid authority. We do not make them up. Click any row to see the citation, the source document, and the engine version that applies it.
Carbon factors · in force
Engine v2.4 · Factors v2.6.1
Live · Supply Chain GHG Factors v1.3 (USD 2022)
Category · NAICS
Rate
Unit
24h
Source
NATGAS / USD221210 · Utility gas distribution
5.31
kg / $
—
EPA Supply Chain GHG Factors v1.3🇺🇸 US
DIESEL / USD324110 · Petroleum refineries
2.63
kg / $
—
EPA Supply Chain GHG Factors v1.3🇺🇸 US
ELEC-CA / USD221100 · California, state-resolved
0.70
kg / $
—
EPA eGRID 2023 rev2🇺🇸 US · CA
ELEC-OH / USD221100 · Ohio, state-resolved
4.55
kg / $
—
EPA eGRID 2023 rev2🇺🇸 US · OH
METALS / USD3311xx · Primary metals
0.50
kg / $
—
EPA Supply Chain GHG Factors v1.3🇺🇸 US
FREIGHT / USD484000 · Truck transportation
0.60
kg / $
—
EPA Supply Chain GHG Factors v1.3🇺🇸 US
AIR-TRAVEL / USD481000 · Scheduled air transport
0.64
kg / $
—
EPA Supply Chain GHG Factors v1.3🇺🇸 US
CLOUD / USD518210 · Data processing & hosting
0.11
kg / $
—
EPA Supply Chain GHG Factors v1.3🇺🇸 US
R-410A / kgGWP100 · IPCC AR5
2,088
kg CO₂e / kg
—
IPCC AR5 (2014)🌍 Global
Factors refresh annually. Citations stamped per report.Full Atlas of sources →
Specimen

The Disclosure-Aligned artifact.

Every tier ships a PDF your auditor can walk an assurance partner through. Every factor stamped. Every credit netted. Every assumption disclosed. This is the Data Quality Summary and methodology appendix, rendered here exactly as it prints.
Not a marketing one-pager

A document an audit partner expects.

Most carbon tools hand the buyer a dashboard screenshot and call it a report. Ours ships a typeset PDF with every number traceable to a source , the same format a CPA would produce for a financial audit, adapted for carbon. The engine version is stamped on every page; if we revise a factor, your prior reports remain reconcilable on their original methodology.

The specimen to the right is a real cut from the Nightmare Manufacturing Q3 2024 report. Scroll inside the paper frame. Every row carries the factor applied and the rule that chose it.

  • Engine + factor version stamp per pagev2.4 · factors v2.6.1
  • Per-row methodology citationNAICS code · eGRID state factor · IPCC AR5 GWP
  • Data Quality Summarymissing rows · imputed rows · confidence scoring
  • Credit / refund disclosurenetted within category per GHG §7.3.2
  • Framework mappingCDP · CSRD · SB-253 · Walmart Gigaton
Prepared for
assurance
review
A·S·F · Disclosure-Aligned · Page 2 of 14
Engine v2.4 · Factors v1.3
Nightmare Spend Corp
Q3 2024 · Carbon Inventory
3,500 rows · CA · Jul–Sep 2024 · Report ID c0905ed3
§ 2.1Emissions by scopekg CO₂e
S1Mobile combustion · gasoline + dieselEPA Hub 2025 · Tables 1+2 · 2.58–2.63 kg/$11,74369.3%
S2Purchased electricityeGRID 2023 rev2 · California, state-resolved · 0.70 kg/$3,91623.1%
S3Value chain (S3.1 · 3.4)Courier · Cloud services1,2817.6%
Total Q316.94 tCO₂e
§ 2.2Data Quality Summaryper GHG Protocol
01Rows processedfrom nightmare_spend_test.csv3,500100%
02Classified high-confidence (≥0.80)vendor or category direct match2,94784.2%
03Classified medium (0.50–0.79)fuzzy or partial keyword match3189.1%
04Manual review requiredlow-confidence rows (<0.50)2356.7%
05Rescued via regex / fuzzySHELL-OIL · MSFT AZURE · etc.87925.1%
§ 2.3Methodology & sourcescited
—EPA Supply Chain GHG Factors v1.3industry-level kg CO₂e / USD factors2024EPA
—eGRID 2023 rev2state-resolved electricity intensity2023EPA
—IPCC AR5 GWP100refrigerants · 2,088 kg CO₂e/kg R-410AAR5IPCC
—GHG Protocol Corporate & Scope 3accounting & reporting standards2004/13WRI/WBCSD
Assurance note. This report is prepared in accordance with the GHG Protocol Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (2004, revised 2015) and the Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Standard (2013). Spend-based categories use EPA Supply Chain GHG Factors v1.3 industry-level factors at ±25-40% uncertainty, an engineering estimate for the method rather than a published figure. Electricity is applied at state-resolved eGRID 2023 rev2 intensities (California for this report). Refrigerants use IPCC AR5 100-year GWP values. Refunds, credits, and billing adjustments are netted within category per §7.3.2. Engine version stamped above is authoritative; prior-period reports remain reconcilable on their original methodology. · End page 2 of 14.
Standard

Five questions. Only one answer passes an auditor.

Every carbon tool faces the same five edge cases. Most treat them as footnotes. We treat them as the product. No competitor names, just the methodology delta. Ask any tool these questions before you buy.
Most spend-based tools
A·S·F · in every report
What happens to a $400 refund on a $2,500 fuel purchase?
Refund is absolutized (counted as emissions) or silently dropped. Your number ends up 15–25% too high and cannot reconcile to the P&L.
Netted within category before the factor is applied, per GHG Protocol §7.3.2. The Data Quality Summary reports how many rows were netted and in which categories. Reconciles to the GL by construction.
Electricity in California vs. Ohio: same number?
National-average factor applied everywhere. A California-based SaaS company gets a Wyoming-coal footprint. Underwriters notice.
A per-state factor, resolved from your billing address and anchored on that state's own commercial electricity price. California is 0.70 kg/$; Ohio is 4.55. A dollar of Ohio electricity carries 6.5× the emissions of a dollar in California.
A German supplier's CSV with EU-formatted numbers?
Silent parse failure. Produces a zero-emissions report or drops every row. You find out when the supplier questionnaire bounces.
Intake auto-detects comma/period decimal conventions, localized headers, and parens-negative notation. Engine stamp confirms the parse path.
How confident is the classification on row 2,847?
Confidence is not surfaced. The buyer cannot distinguish a high-confidence vendor match from a guess, and the auditor cannot either.
Per-row confidence score on the Disclosure-Aligned tier. Low-confidence rows surfaced in the Data Quality Summary for manual review.
Where does this number come from, exactly?
Factor source is buried in a methodology page that cites “EPA, Exiobase, DEFRA, and proprietary” with no way to reproduce any specific number.
Every row carries its factor, the matching rule that chose it, and the authority behind it: NAICS code, EPA document, date, engine version. The methodology drawer on this page is the same as the PDF's.
Method

Three steps. No consultant.

Your accountant can run it. Your auditor can read it. Your procurement team can forward it to a supplier portal without scheduling a meeting.
01 · UPLOAD

Export from your books.

A CSV from any GL: QuickBooks, Xero, NetSuite, Sage, SAP. Two columns required: vendor and amount. Everything else is optional.

256-bit TLS · every row kept as your audit trail
02 · CLASSIFY

We apply the factors.

Every vendor mapped to a USEEIO commodity code. Every line multiplied by the current EPA emission factor. A confidence score per row.

EPA Supply Chain GHG Factors v1.3 · eGRID 2023 · IPCC AR5
03 · DISCLOSE

A report, assurance-ready.

A GHG-Protocol-aligned PDF with methodology appendix and every factor cited. The Disclosure-Aligned tier adds a working spreadsheet: every tCO2e a live formula over an editable factor table, so your auditor can substitute their own factor and watch the total move.

CDP · CSRD · SB-253 · Walmart Gigaton
Anatomy

A rose of the scopes.

From a real Q3 2024 report: Nightmare Spend Corp, a 3,500-row California fixture, classified by the live engine: 16.94 tCO₂e total. Sector angle is proportional to kg CO₂e. Labels from GHG Protocol Corporate Standard; factors from US EPA USEEIO + eGRID 2022 (CAMX subregion). Hover any sector or legend row.
S1 · Mobile combustion · gasoline
Gasoline · 32411067%
S2 · Purchased electricity
eGRID CAMX23%
S3.4 · Courier · delivery
USEEIO · 4922104%
67%23%4%3%3%NIGHTMARE Q3 202416.94tCO₂e
S3.1 · Cloud services
Hosting · 5182103%
S1 · Mobile combustion · diesel
Diesel · 3241103%
Estimate

Drag the ledger.

A screening-grade estimate in five sliders, the same EPA factors the real engine ships. Spend-based screening carries roughly ±25-40%, an engineering estimate for the method rather than a published figure. For audit-quality, upload your real CSV.
A spend-to-emissions worksheet

Move a slider. Watch the atmosphere.

Enter approximate quarterly spend in each category. The engine applies the same USEEIO or eGRID factor it would apply to your real data, in real time.

Five lines here; the real engine handles the long tail: every row of your GL, every vendor, every factor cited in the audit trail of the disclosure-aligned report.

Factors · EPA USEEIO v2.2, eGRID 2022 (CAMX subregion shown), IPCC AR5. Screening-grade. Actual reports use vendor-level USEEIO mapping with a per-row confidence score.
Purchased electricity
S2 · eGRID 2023 · state · 0.70 kg/$
$3,5002,450 kg
Natural gas
S1 · 221210 · 5.31 kg/$
$1,2006,372 kg
Diesel & fleet fuel
S1 · 324110 · 2.63 kg/$
$2,4006,312 kg
Freight & logistics
S3.4 · 484000 · 0.59 kg/$
$1,8001,071 kg
Cloud & SaaS
S3.1 · 518210 · 0.11 kg/$
$1,200133 kg
Estimated emissions · Q
16,338kg CO₂e
090k180k
16,338 kgscale · 180k
Readers

Three readers. One ledger.

The same disclosure-aligned report is read by a CFO before the board, by a CPA during reconciliation, and by a sustainability lead when a supplier questionnaire lands. Each gets what they need, on a different page.
For the CFO

A number you can defend.

A single-page editor's note: what the engine could and could not identify in your ledger, the split by scope, and the coverage gap stated in tonnes rather than adjectives.

Stamped with engine version, factor sources, and the methodology section an auditor would expect. No vibes, no vanity metrics.

For the CPA

Reconciles to the general ledger.

Net-of-refunds category totals that tie back to the P&L. Credits netted within category (not silently dropped, not absolutized) per GHG Protocol §7.3.2.

A Data Quality Summary with every assumption surfaced, and the rows we could not identify listed by name and amount. If the number doesn't tie to the books, we consider that a bug.

For sustainability

Answers for the questionnaire.

Walmart Project Gigaton, Microsoft Supplier Sustainability, CDP Supply Chain, California SB-253, mapped directly from the disclosure-aligned report.

Every claim traceable to the factor, the source, and the engine version that produced it. Copy, paste, done.

Pricing

Three depths. One engine.

Every tier uses the same USEEIO classification engine and the same GHG-Protocol output. The difference is how deep into Scope 3 we go, and how much transaction-level lineage you get.
Scope
S1 · S2
Basic
$20per report
one-time

Direct combustion and purchased energy. The minimum a vendor RFP usually asks for.

  • ✓Stationary fuelS1
  • ✓Mobile combustionS1
  • ✓Purchased electricityS2
  • ✓GHG Protocol appendix
  • ✓Factor citations
Begin
Most chosen
Scope
S1 · S2 · S3*
Complete
$49per report
one-time

The full material supply chain. Travel, logistics, and purchased goods: the long shadow of the business.

  • ✓All of Basic
  • ✓Purchased goodsS3.1
  • ✓Business travelS3.6
  • ✓Upstream logisticsS3.4
  • ✓Data quality scoring
Begin
Scope
S1 · S2 · S3
Disclosure-Aligned
$299per report
one-time

Every transaction with lineage, confidence, and framework mapping. The auditor's starting line.

  • ✓All of Complete
  • ✓Transaction-level lineage
  • ✓CDP / CSRD / SB-253 map
  • ✓Methodology appendix
Begin
Why now

Carbon reporting in 2026.

Four shifts that moved carbon from marketing claim to filing obligation. Read through before a supplier questionnaire or a regulator lands in your inbox, not after.
10.1

The regulatory calendar caught up.

In 2026 the EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) is in live-reporting mode for the first wave of companies, roughly 11,700 large and mid-sized firms filing on 2025 emissions data using the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). In the US, California SB-253 requires companies with over $1 billion in revenue doing business in California to report Scope 1 and 2 emissions, with first reports due August 10, 2026 and Scope 3 from 2027. Those Scope 3 filings reach down the supply chain: if you sell to a large enterprise, expect a request for your emissions data. The UK adopted ISSB's IFRS S1/S2 for 2026. Carbon is now a filing obligation, not a marketing claim.

10.2

Your customers moved first.

Walmart's Project Gigaton expected 1 gigaton of supply-chain emissions cuts by 2030, with every supplier filing data. Microsoft Supplier Sustainability requires carbon disclosure on every renewal. Apple's Supplier Clean Energy Program demands Scope 2 accounting at renewable intensity. CDP Supply Chain now counts 280+ buying organizations requesting emission data from 70,000+ of their suppliers. If you sell to any Fortune-500 buyer, you will receive a supplier carbon questionnaire in 2026.

10.3

The cost of not having an answer.

A supplier-disclosure request from a large enterprise buyer typically carries a 30–60 day response deadline. Scrambling to assemble an answer under a deadline leads to one of two bad outcomes: (a) you submit a half-estimate built from public-record data, which the buyer's procurement team discounts and scores lower in their supplier rating, costing renewal leverage; (b) you hire a sustainability consultant on emergency terms at $5,000–$15,000 per engagement for what should have been a one-hour task if you had baseline emissions data ready. Having a screening-grade Carbon Draft in hand before a questionnaire lands saves both.

10.4

The accountant advantage.

Your accounting firm already has your AP data. They already understand GAAP, ASC 606 net-revenue treatment, and how to reconcile a number to the general ledger. They already sign off on your financials annually. A carbon engagement that uses spend data is a natural extension of work they already do, not a separate sustainability consulting project. Pack pricing through our CPA Partner Program lets the firm offer carbon reporting as a new service line at 50–67% off retail, retaining the client relationship and professional judgment while the engine handles the classification layer.

Read further ·Full methodology →Atlas of factor sources →Engine changelog →CPA Partner Program →GRI framework guide →SASB framework guide →TCFD framework guide →Writing · recent dispatches →Contact sales →
FAQ

Questions auditors ask.

Eight questions we get most often from CFOs, CPAs, and procurement leads evaluating Carbon Draft against in-house or consultant-led alternatives. Structured so Google can surface these in search results directly. Every Q&A below is picked up by the FAQPage schema below.
11.01What is a Carbon Draft?+
A Carbon Draft is a GHG-Protocol-aligned carbon emissions report generated from your company's spend data (a CSV exported from QuickBooks, Xero, NetSuite, Sage, or SAP). We classify every vendor to an EPA USEEIO commodity code, apply the published emission factor, and return a Scope 1, 2, and 3 inventory with every factor cited. Three tiers: Basic ($20) covers Scope 1 & 2, Complete ($49) adds Scope 3, Disclosure-Aligned Report ($299) adds per-row lineage and framework mapping for CDP, CSRD, and California SB-253.
11.02Which frameworks does the report align with?+
GHG Protocol Corporate Standard (2015 revised) and Scope 3 Standard (2013) for the emissions methodology. Factor sources: EPA Supply Chain GHG Emission Factors v1.3 (2022 USD) for spend-based categories, EPA eGRID 2023 rev2 for electricity (state-resolved for US locations; the eGRID subregion is used instead when you supply metered kWh), and IPCC AR5 GWP100 for refrigerants. The Disclosure-Aligned Report tier adds direct mapping to CDP Supply Chain, CSRD/ESRS, California SB-253, UN SDGs, and supplier questionnaires from Walmart Project Gigaton and Microsoft Supplier Sustainability.
11.03How accurate is a spend-based estimate?+
Spend-based carbon accounting using EPA USEEIO factors carries ±25–40% uncertainty at the category level, per GHG Protocol Scope 3 Standard §7.3.2. This is acceptable for screening, supplier disclosure responses, and identifying emission hotspots. For regulatory filings or third-party assurance, upgrade high-impact categories to activity-based data (gallons of fuel, therms of gas, kWh of electricity) using EPA AP-42 or DEFRA factors. Our Disclosure-Aligned Report tier supports activity-data overrides alongside spend-based totals.
11.04How long does report generation take?+
Under five minutes from CSV upload to PDF download. The classifier runs in about 60 seconds on typical SMB data (under 5,000 rows), and the PDF renders in another few seconds. There is no waiting list, no consultant engagement, no multi-week turnaround.
11.05Is my financial data secure?+
We keep each transaction line - vendor, amount, category and date - alongside the classification and emission factor we applied to it, associated with your email address, so you can re-download your report for 12 months. That per-row record IS the audit trail: it is what the transaction ledger in your PDF is printed from, and it is what lets anyone check how a number was reached. A carbon figure whose underlying rows have been deleted cannot be verified by you or by anyone you send it to. Payment processing is handled by Dodo Payments (PCI-compliant). We do not share your data with third parties and do not sell anonymized aggregates. See our Privacy Policy for full details.
11.06Does the Carbon Draft satisfy CSRD, CDP, or supplier-questionnaire requirements directly?+
A Carbon Draft is a screening-grade document. For a formal regulatory filing (CSRD in the EU), or to feed emissions data into a large customer's California SB-253 Scope 3 disclosure or a CDP Supply Chain submission, you will typically need a full activity-based inventory plus third-party verification from an assurance partner. Our Disclosure-Aligned Report tier is designed as the starting point of that assurance engagement. It front-loads the preparation an auditor would otherwise bill you for: the inventory, the audit trail, and the factor citations are already assembled. For SMBs responding to a supplier questionnaire from Walmart, Microsoft, or Apple, the Complete or Disclosure-Aligned tier is often sufficient on its own.
11.07What happens to refunds, credits, and returns in the calculation?+
Credits, refunds, returns, and billing adjustments are netted within their emission category before the factor is applied, per GHG Protocol Scope 3 Standard §7.3.2 (economic-value method). This aligns with GAAP ASC 606 and IFRS 15 net-revenue treatment. The Data Quality Summary reports how many rows were netted and in which categories, so your auditor can reconcile to the P&L by construction. The Disclosure-Aligned workbook carries the per-row detail behind it.
11.08Is there a partner or pack-pricing program for CPAs and accounting firms?+
Yes. Our CPA Partner Program offers volume pricing starting at 10 reports for $1,490 ($149 each, saving 50% vs the single-report price of $299). 25-packs are $2,975 ($119 each, 60% off), 50-packs are $4,950 ($99 each, 67% off). Your firm keeps the client relationship and the methodology review; we provide the underlying engine. Apply via the For Accountants page.

A quarter of AP, one carbon report.

Upload a CSV. Receive a GHG-Protocol Scope 1, 2, and 3 report with every factor cited, every credit netted, and a methodology appendix a CPA can walk an auditor through. In five minutes. From $20.

Generate a draft Read the specimen
Engine version
v2.4factors v2.6.1
Factor sources
4EPA · eGRID · IPCC · DEFRA
Turnaround
< 5minutes
Starting price
$20per report