What MasterBrain does not have

We hold the dataset and declined to publish it. Australian_Scope123_intensities_2019 is Australian industry-classified, separates Scope 1/2/3 and states its GWP set as AR6 in the file. It is a derived EXIOBASE product and therefore inherits the CC BY-SA 4.0 viral share-alike licence, which would pass an obligation to any customer receiving it in a feed sold as redistributable. Declined pending verification that the bulk corpus feed excludes share-alike rows.

Publishers checked

Australian Scope 1/2/3 intensities 2019 (ABS input-output coupled with EXIOBASE 3.9.5)

Route in

Supplied by hand and validated. Blocked on licence, not access. A share-alike-free alternative exists — ABS input-output tables 5209.0.55.001 — but building an EEIO from them is a modelling project, not an ingest.

Where to look instead

What AUS does have Factors in this family

Confidence

high

Last reviewed

2026-08-16 next due 2027-02-16

No publisher issues a Canadian residual mix. Green-e / Center for Resource Solutions is the only body that ever did, and its current product is explicitly US-only: the 2025 release covers 27 eGRID subregions and no Canadian geography, and CRS describes its own factors as covering "untracked and unclaimed US-based sources of electricity". Without a residual mix there is no market-based default for Canada; a Canadian buyer with no supplier-specific contract falls back to the location-based grid factors we already carry.

Publishers checked

Green-e / Center for Resource Solutions — 2025 Residual Mix Emissions Rates: 27 US eGRID subregions, no Canadian geography · Center for Resource Solutions — "Residual Mix Applications and Existing Data", September 2023: an 11-page inventory of residual mixes worldwide that does not mention Canada once; its section on residual mix outside the US is about the European AIB · Environment and Climate Change Canada — publishes generation intensity, not a residual mix

Route in

Nothing to request. This record previously said Canadian NERC-region data was "available on request" and classified the gap as not_yet_sourced at medium-high confidence. That was WRONG, and the error is worth naming: the claim came from a 2016 third-party news article reporting that Green-e published "US and Canada" figures, and was never checked against the publisher. CRS's own 2023 data inventory and its own current release both say US-only. Reclassified on primary sources 2026-08-16.

Where to look instead

What CAN does have Factors in this family

Confidence

high

Last reviewed

2026-08-16 next due 2027-02-16

No Canadian national publisher issues a water supply or treatment factor. Canadian practice is regional and utility-specific, and the underlying intensity varies with the local grid and source water, so a single national figure would assert precision the quantity does not have. This is the same finding already settled for the United States.

Publishers checked

ECCC National Inventory Report Annexes 6 and 7 — ingested; carries no water factor · BC Provincial Public Sector methodology — provincial, not national · Region of Waterloo — 61.25 gCO2e/m3, a municipal figure

Route in

Regional figures exist and are not a national factor. See the USA water ruling in gc-api-roadmap.md.

Where to look instead

What CAN does have Factors in this family

Confidence

high

Last reviewed

2026-08-16 next due 2027-02-16

Canadian district energy is municipal or private with supplier-specific factors; no national delivered-heat factor is published. A secondary claim that ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager carries a Canadian national district-energy factor was checked against that document and is false — it carries US and eGRID factors only.

Publishers checked

ECCC National Inventory Report Annexes 6 and 7 — ingested; no district-heat factor · ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager GHG emissions reference — read; no Canadian district factors · ECCC Emission Factors and Reference Values v3.0 (En84-294-2025) — CONFIRMED; no district-heat table

Route in

En84-294 supplied by hand and read 2026-08-16. Its full scope is fossil fuel combustion, grid electricity consumption intensity, biogas combustion, forest management and enteric methane — and it is scoped to the GHG Offset Credit System, not corporate inventory. Canada publishes no federal corporate-reporting factor compendium equivalent to Australia's Emissions Reporting Framework or the UK's DEFRA set; that absence is the root cause of several Canadian gaps.

Where to look instead

What CAN does have Factors in this family

Confidence

high

Last reviewed

2026-08-16 next due 2027-02-16

No Canadian federal per-passenger-kilometre table was located. The National Inventory Report publishes national totals, not per-pkm factors, and operator figures such as VIA Rail's are derived from that operator's own fuel use. This is a real difference in publishing practice: DEFRA, ADEME and EPA all publish per-pkm tables.

Publishers checked

ECCC National Inventory Report — totals, not per-pkm factors · Transport Canada / Natural Resources Canada Energy Use Data Handbook — energy intensity by mode, not a published factor set · ECCC Emission Factors and Reference Values v3.0 (En84-294-2025) — CONFIRMED; no per-passenger-km table

Route in

En84-294 supplied by hand and read 2026-08-16. The contrast with Australia is the finding: Australia's Emissions Reporting Framework publishes hire-car g CO2/km and flight factors, and Canada has no federal document of that kind at all.

Where to look instead

What CAN does have Factors in this family

Confidence

high

Last reviewed

2026-08-16 next due 2027-02-16

The National Greenhouse Accounts Factors publish no per-kilolitre purchased-water factor. Australian practice computes water emissions from energy used, as kWh times the state grid factor, and only state and utility-level figures exist. Note the distinction: NGA Tables 17-19 cover wastewater, incineration and biological treatment as Scope 1 factors for operating a treatment plant, which is a different question from the Scope 3 factor a company applies to its water bill.

Publishers checked

DCCEEW National Greenhouse Accounts Factors 2025 — CONFIRMED, all 27 sheets enumerated; no purchased-water table · Australian Government Emissions Reporting Framework 2025-26 — CONFIRMED; no water table

Route in

Both workbooks supplied by hand and read 2026-08-16. NGA Table 17 is "Emission factors by wastewater treatment type" in t CO2-e PER PERSON by treatment technology — a Scope 1 operator factor for running a plant, which is why it does not answer a purchased-water question.

Where to look instead

What AUS does have Factors in this family

Confidence

high

Last reviewed

2026-08-16 next due 2027-02-16

The National Greenhouse Accounts Factors contain no district-heat table, and Australia has negligible district heating for climate and building-stock reasons.

Publishers checked

DCCEEW National Greenhouse Accounts Factors 2025 — CONFIRMED, all 27 sheets enumerated; no district-heat or purchased-steam table · Australian Government Emissions Reporting Framework 2025-26 — CONFIRMED; no district-heat table either

Route in

Both workbooks supplied by hand and read 2026-08-16. Australia has negligible district heating, and neither of its two national factor sets carries one.

Where to look instead

What AUS does have Factors in this family

Confidence

high

Last reviewed

2026-08-16 next due 2027-02-16

A Dutch residual mix is not merely unpublished, it is ILL-DEFINED. The Netherlands operates a FULL DISCLOSURE regime, meaning every kilowatt-hour supplied is tracked to a disclosed source, so there is no untracked residue for a residual mix to describe. The AIB, which calculates the European Residual Mix and counts the Netherlands as a member, explicitly does NOT publish one for it — the same treatment as Austria and Switzerland. The AIB's own FAQ records that UNTIL 2023 Austria and Switzerland were published with a "Zero Residual Mix", 0% for every energy source including the emission factor, and states the principle plainly: all energy consumption must be disclosed to end consumers using cancelled GOs, renewable or otherwise, so no undetermined consumption remains. ADOPTION YEARS DELIBERATELY NOT STATED, AND THE REMOVAL IS THE CORRECTION: until 2026-09-10 this record said the Netherlands had full disclosure "since 2024" and Austria and Switzerland "since 2017 and 2022". None of those three years is supported by the AIB material named below, and the AIB's "until 2023" framing points the other way for AT and CH. They are removed rather than re-sourced, because a year nobody checked is worse than no year at all. WHAT TO USE INSTEAD: your supplier's disclosed mix, which under full disclosure is the complete and correct answer for a market-based figure. A residual mix would be the wrong instrument, not a missing one.

Publishers checked

AIB European Residual Mix 2025 — 32 countries published; Netherlands deliberately excluded, full disclosure regime · AIB FAQ "Residual Mix" (aib-net.org/faq/residual-mix) — read 2026-09-10. States the full-disclosure principle and that "Until 2023, Austria and Switzerland had a Zero Residual Mix, showing 0% for all energy sources, including the emission factor." Gives NO adoption year for any of the three countries, and does not mention the Netherlands on that page at all

Route in

aib-net.org publishes the annual results; we already hold 32 AIB countries under AIB_RESIDUAL_MIX_2025. The Dutch absence is the publisher's deliberate methodological position, not a gap in our ingest.

Where to look instead

What NLD does have Factors in this family

Confidence

high

Last reviewed

2026-08-16 next due 2027-02-16

No Dutch publisher issues a water supply factor per cubic metre, and the sector has deliberately built something else instead. KWR and the water companies produced Operational Code PCD11, a METHOD for each utility to calculate its own footprint, explicitly flexible so that "drinking water utilities can interpret it according to their situation". A shared per-m3 factor is not an oversight in that design; it is the thing the design declines to produce. Vewin publishes the physical intensity instead — 0.50 kWh of electricity per cubic metre of drinking water produced, flat since 2015 — which is an energy figure, not an emission factor. THE PRACTICAL ANSWER IS ENERGY-BASED: multiply metered cubic metres by that intensity and by the Dutch grid factor we already carry. That is the same shape as the settled Australian water ruling, where national practice is also kWh times a grid factor.

Publishers checked

CO2emissiefactoren.nl (Rijkswaterstaat, Milieu Centraal, Stimular, SKAO, Connekt) — the national list; full list read, no water supply category · CBS Table 82883NED "Watergebruik binnen de Nederlandse economie; Milieurekeningen", 2003-2023 — CHECKED VIA THE OPEN-DATA API: every topic is a volume in mln m3 and there is no emission variable in the table. The CBS "emissies naar water" accounts are pollutant discharges, not greenhouse gases, and were discontinued in 2010 · Vewin — Drinkwaterstatistieken 2022, 82 pages read: zero occurrences of "kg CO", zero of "emissiefactor". It publishes 0.50 kWh/m3 produced instead · Milieubarometer / Stimular — actuele CO2-emissiefactoren: no drinking-water factor. Its only water entry is afvalwater at 26.27 kg CO2e per vervuilingseenheid, which we already carry as waste_disposal.nld.wastewater.per_pollution_unit and which deliberately does not count toward this family · KWR / Operational Code PCD11 "Berekening CO2-voetafdruk van drinkwaterbedrijven" — a calculation method for individual utilities, not a published factor

Route in

Both routes this record previously named as unchecked have now been checked against primary sources, and two further publishers with them. Nothing to ingest. Note that the Dutch wastewater factor IS published and IS already in the corpus — it is filed under waste_disposal rather than water because it is per population-equivalent, a discharge metric, not a purchased-volume one. That exclusion is a ruling, not a defect, and it is the same distinction drawn against the Australian NGA wastewater table. Verified and upgraded from medium confidence 2026-08-17.

Where to look instead

What NLD does have Factors in this family

Confidence

high

Last reviewed

2026-08-17 next due 2027-02-17

No US national publisher issues a water supply or treatment factor, and this is a documented characteristic of the sector rather than a search failure. US convention is embedded energy intensity times a regional grid factor, and the intensity varies about two-fold by city — roughly 2,700 kWh per million gallons in New York against 5,000 in Austin. A single national US water factor would be a fiction.

Publishers checked

EPA GHG Emission Factors Hub — Tables 1-12 verified, no water table

Route in

Settled 2026-08-15. Asking for the file does not help; the quantity is not published nationally.

Where to look instead

What USA does have Factors in this family

Confidence

high

Last reviewed

2026-08-16 next due 2027-02-16

Not an independent gap. The commuting family is answered by ground-mode business travel rows, and Canada holds none, so commuting reads zero because travel reads zero. Sourcing any Canadian ground-mode travel factor closes both in the same release.

Zero because travel is zero — counting it separately would report one gap twice.

Publishers checked

see can.travel

Route in

Resolved by closing can.travel.

Where to look instead

What CAN does have Factors in this family

Confidence

high

Last reviewed

2026-08-16 next due 2027-02-16

We withdrew a number rather than replaced it, and we are saying so. Until MB v2026.175 these countries carried an Ember figure under this key. Ember's intensity is full-lifecycle and multi-gas — confirmed from the publisher's own method note — while `location_based` names a GHG Protocol scope 2 instrument, which asserts direct emissions at the point of generation. The value was not wrong; it was the wrong instrument, and a lifecycle figure presented as scope 2 overstates a reporter's scope 2 and would not survive audit. It has moved to grid.<iso3>.electricity.lifecycle_intensity, where it is correct and where all 212 countries remain comparable on one method. WHAT WE HAVE NOT DONE is survey what should now fill this key. Many of these countries do publish a national grid factor; we have not checked which. This record claims nothing about them beyond that we have not looked.

Publishers checked

None for these countries — that is precisely what this classification records. Six countries were checked and are NOT in this class: gbr (DEFRA_2026) and usa (EPA_EGRID_2023) already held national factors; can (ECCC_NIR_2026) and aus (DCCEEW_NGA_2025) were sourced and written in the same release; fra (ADEME) and nld (CE Delft / CBS) are sourced but held back on unresolved boundary questions and are listed here in the interim.

Route in

A country leaves this class by being surveyed. The likely first candidates are the countries whose Ember figure was least representative of consumption: 20 of the 212 import more than a quarter of their demand and 10 more than half — Palestine and Macau at 87.6%, Luxembourg 76.2% — and Ember excludes imports by construction, so the withdrawn figure described a minority of what those countries actually consume. Measurement: ~/gc-sources/2026-08-19-grid-import-boundary/. For fra and nld the blocker is not sourcing but boundary: see ~/gc-sources/2026-08-19-nld-td-boundary/, which resolved the Dutch T&D question and opened a denominator question in its place.

Where to look instead

Factors in this family

Confidence

high

Last reviewed

2026-08-19 next due 2027-02-19