Sanity-check a greenhouse gas inventory before it goes into a report or gets audited. Use when asked to review a carbon footprint, check a GHG inventory, validate scope 1/2/3 numbers, explain a year-over-year emissions change, or prepare emissions data for assurance. Produces a boundary review, data-quality assessment, emission-factor sensitivity list, YoY bridge, and a fix-before-publishing list.
Scanned 9/3/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills --skill carbon-accounting-check --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Carbon Accounting Check?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/mohitagw15856-carbon-accounting-check)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: carbon-accounting-check
description: "Sanity-check a greenhouse gas inventory before it goes into a report or gets audited. Use when asked to review a carbon footprint, check a GHG inventory, validate scope 1/2/3 numbers, explain a year-over-year emissions change, or prepare emissions data for assurance. Produces a boundary review, data-quality assessment, emission-factor sensitivity list, YoY bridge, and a fix-before-publishing list."
homepage: https://mohitagw15856.github.io/pm-claude-skills/skill/carbon-accounting-check.html
metadata:
{
"openclaw": { "emoji": "🌍" }
}
---
# Carbon Accounting Check Skill
A GHG inventory fails audit (and credibility) on boundaries, factors, and data quality — rarely on arithmetic. This skill runs a structured sanity pass over an inventory so the weak points are found internally, not by an assurer or a journalist. It reviews rigor; it does not certify compliance.
## What This Skill Produces
- A scope 1/2/3 boundary review with gaps and out-of-boundary items named
- A data-quality tier map (measured / calculated / estimated / proxy) per emission source
- The top emission-factor sensitivities — where a factor choice swings the total
- A year-over-year bridge separating real reduction from methodology or boundary change
- Double-counting flags and a prioritized fix list
## Required Inputs
Ask for these if not provided; if the brief is thin, proceed with clearly labelled assumptions rather than refusing:
- **Inventory data** — emissions by scope and category, with units (tCO2e), and the reporting year
- **Organizational boundary** — operational control, financial control, or equity share, and which entities are in/out
- **Scope 2 method(s)** — location-based, market-based, or both; contractual instruments held (RECs, GOs, PPAs)
- **Emission factor sources** — which factor sets and vintages were used per category
- **Data provenance** — per major source: meter/invoice, activity-data calculation, estimate, or spend-based proxy
- **Prior-year inventory** (optional) — needed for the YoY bridge
- **Offsets or removals held** (optional) — reviewed separately, never netted
## Review Framework
Walk the inventory in this order:
**1. Boundary.** Confirm the consolidation approach is stated and applied consistently. For scope 3, check all 15 GHG Protocol categories were screened — a category may be excluded only with a stated reason and a rough size estimate.
**2. Scope 2 duality.** Both market- and location-based figures should exist. Flag market-based claims without matching contractual instruments (vintage, geography, retirement).
**3. Data-quality tiers.** Assign each material source a tier and estimate what share of the total sits in each:
| Tier | Basis | Typical uncertainty |
|---|---|---|
| Measured | Meters, fuel invoices, utility bills | Low |
| Calculated | Activity data × published factor | Low–medium |
| Estimated | Extrapolation, averages, occupancy models | Medium–high |
| Proxy | Spend-based, industry-average intensity | High — directional only |
Flag any headline claim (e.g. "-12% YoY") that rests mostly on proxy-tier data.
**4. Factor sensitivity.** Identify the 3–5 sources where switching to an equally defensible factor set or vintage moves the total by >2%. Recompute or estimate the swing.
**5. YoY bridge.** Decompose the change into: activity change, factor/vintage updates, boundary changes, methodology changes, and data-quality improvements. Only the first is a real emissions trend.
**6. Double-counting traps.** Check the classics: fleet fuel in both scope 1 and scope 3 category 6; electricity in scope 2 and again via spend-based scope 3; parent and subsidiary both claiming the same site; RECs claimed against grid averages already lowered by those RECs; leased assets counted by both lessor and lessee.
## Output Format
### GHG inventory check: [organization, reporting year]
**1. Summary verdict** — publishable as-is / publishable with caveats / fix first, with the two or three decisive reasons.
**2. Boundary review** — consolidation approach, scope 3 category screening table (included / excluded + reason + size estimate), gaps.
**3. Data-quality map** — table of major sources × tier × share of total, with the weakest material sources called out.
**4. Factor sensitivities** — the top swings, each with source, alternative factor, and estimated delta.
**5. YoY bridge** — waterfall from prior year to current year with each driver quantified or labelled as an estimate.
**6. Flags and fixes** — numbered list, each with severity (blocks publication / caveat needed / improve next cycle) and a concrete fix.
Include this line in the artifact: *"Verify boundary, methodology, and disclosure choices against the applicable standard (e.g. GHG Protocol, ISO 14064-1) and regulation with your compliance team and assurer."*
## Quality Checks
- [ ] Consolidation approach is stated and every in/out entity decision is visible
- [ ] All 15 scope 3 categories are screened; exclusions have a reason and a size estimate
- [ ] Both scope 2 methods are reported, or the absence of one is flagged
- [ ] Every material source has a data-quality tier; the share of total per tier is stated
- [ ] The YoY bridge separates real activity change from methodology and boundary effects
- [ ] Each flag has a severity and a concrete fix, not just an observation
- [ ] Assumptions made from a thin brief are labelled as assumptions
## Anti-Patterns
- [ ] Do not net offsets or removals against gross emissions in the headline number — report gross, then offsets separately
- [ ] Do not present a market-based scope 2 figure without naming the contractual instruments behind it
- [ ] Do not let a YoY "reduction" stand if it is driven by a factor-vintage update or boundary change — say so
- [ ] Do not treat spend-based proxy data as if it supports precise claims — flag it as directional
- [ ] Do not silently drop scope 3 categories — every exclusion needs a reason and a size estimate
- [ ] Do not certify compliance — this is a rigor review; assurance and legal sign-off stay with the professionals
## Based On
GHG Protocol Corporate Standard and Scope 2/Scope 3 guidance practice (boundaries, dual reporting, data-quality tiers, recalculation policy).
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!