What the register holds on your projects

Paste identifiers. You get one of three answers per project, and the difference between them is the point. The register holds records on it; it sits inside the coverage with nothing recorded against it; or it falls outside the coverage, in which case the register says nothing either way. Nothing held is a statement about the record, not about the project.

Your identifiers

One per line, or comma separated. Registry identifiers in any common form: VCS1477, VCS 1477, Verra 1477, ACR0360, CAR1004, GS1368, CAFR0070, CALS5040, ERF109627, ART101.

Runs entirely in your browser. The register ships with this page, so what you paste is never sent anywhere. There is nowhere for it to be sent to.

The inclusion rule, published before you run anything

A nil answer means nothing unless you know what was looked at, and how deeply. The Carbon Loss Register, edition six: records as at 3 September 2026, coverage as at 31 August 2026. 15,080 projects inside the coverage; 250 records held across 179 projects. Two registers are covered completely, from the regulator's own loss table. Five are covered partially, from the Berkeley database as it records them, and a nil in those means less.

Verra (VCS)partiallisted projects from the Berkeley voluntary registry database v2026-06; loss records assembled project by project from public documents, because Verra publishes no buffer pool ledger
Gold Standardpartiallisted projects from the Berkeley voluntary registry database v2026-06
American Carbon Registrypartiallisted projects from the Berkeley voluntary registry database v2026-06, with registry confirmation of the cancellation layer
Climate Action Reservepartiallisted projects from the Reserve's own project and issuance exports
ART TREESpartiallisted projects from the Berkeley voluntary registry database v2026-06
California (CARB)completethe California compliance programme in full: the regulator publishes project level reversal, invalidation and buffer data in structured form
Australia (Clean Energy Regulator, ACCUs)completethe Australian ACCU register in full, including the relinquishment layer

Only openly publishable sources are searched. 15 projects reach us solely through a source licensed for internal use; those abstain rather than return a nil, because we hold something and may not publish it either way. And a project absent from the snapshot of current listings is not a project that is not real: 67 of the projects in this register are archived, withdrawn or removed, and every one of them is missing from that snapshot for exactly that reason. For an identifier you type that the snapshot does not carry, the register cannot tell from the identifier alone whether it was removed or never issued, and says so rather than guessing.

How to read an empty answer

Most of any real book comes back empty. That is the normal case, and every profession that had this problem before us solved it the same way: by naming the states and publishing the scope.

AuditReports in the negative: nothing came to the practitioner's attention, within a stated scope. Explicitly not an audit opinion, and the standard makes them say so.
InsuranceThe loss run: a carrier's record of claims against a named insured over a stated period. A clean loss run is a routine underwriting input. Nobody reads it as proof that nothing happened.
Consumer creditSeparates a scored file, a thin file and a credit invisible, because collapsing them penalised the invisible for the delinquent's record.
Catastrophe lossPublishes inclusion thresholds, so an empty period reads as out of scope rather than as calm.
Drug safetySupplies the caution we take seriously: spontaneous reporting is chronically incomplete, and absence of a signal is not evidence of safety. Our position is worse, because most voluntary reversals sit in prose inside monitoring reports and no table counts them.