Five tiers of analysis, unlocked as you subscribe.

Tier 1 has a monthly side and an annual side, and they read different things. The monthly side reads your bills: set the site up with water, energy and production units, then a dozen numbers a month, plotted against published brewery and distillery benchmarks for your size and watched against your own trend. The baseline audit reads your production records: fermentations, still runs, blends, casks, packaging and purchases, for a basic and process-level audit. Everything else follows from that.

• Start wherever your plant actually is. A site that cannot produce batch-level records yet still gets intensity, sector bands and drift alerts from twelve numbers a month. A site that can gets the whole audit. Neither is a lesser subscription — they are the same one.
• Each side hands its data to the other. Bills already parsed on the data page appear in the monthly grid on one click; months typed into the grid become the utility table the audit, benchmark and scenario pages read. Nothing is entered twice, and nothing is silently divided by the wrong month's production.
• The audit says where the loss is. Mash and fermentation yield against theoretical, still performance, angels' share, cost of poor quality, and a data-integrity pass over the lot — with the denominator derived from the plant rather than typed. It also carries a full GHG Protocol Scope 1/2/3 inventory, which a utility bill alone cannot, plus quality and supply-chain tracking.
• Tier 2 prices the gap. Every intensity's distance to the sector average as a dollar figure a year, with a confidence rating and the metric tons of CO₂e in the same gap. The monthly side deliberately stops short of this: it shows you that you sit above the median, and leaves the distance unpriced until there is a plant behind the number.

The platform's own analysis is organized into five tiers. Each one builds on the data and findings of the tier before it, and each is what unlocks when you upgrade — the tool itself shows you exactly what the next tier would tell you about your own data before you commit to it.

Measured against a fixed industry target, none of those events show up at all — a good plant stays comfortably inside the band the whole way down. Measured against its own recent performance, each one is visible within a month or two, while it is still cheap to reverse. So the alerting works off your own trailing numbers rather than a published benchmark: the benchmark is for deciding what to fix, and the trend is for keeping it fixed.

• Set the site up once, then a dozen numbers a month. Water, energy and production for the month, in whatever units your bill uses — the tool normalizes them, and watches for the unit itself changing between months, which is the most common way a series like this quietly breaks.
• Drift alerts on your own baseline. A plant already running at 3.6 hL/hL should not be congratulated for beating an industry median of 7.5 — it should be told the month it starts running at 4.1.
• Published sector bands, sourced. Craft-brewery cohorts and, for distilleries, the Scotch Whisky Association, EPA/ENERGY STAR and the published LCA literature — each band carrying the publisher, the year and the boundary it was measured on. Distilleries can split in-house LPA from bulk brought in, because the two give very different denominators.
• Or skip the typing. Send the utility workbooks as they arrive — one sheet per year, start and end dates, a quantity and a cost — and they are read in and reconciled to the right months for you. Bills the platform has already parsed are one click away in the same grid.
• A printable one-pager, any month. The same figures, exportable when a lender, buyer or program asks for them.

It deals in actuals — the meter reading, the invoice, the volume you made, and where that puts you against your cohort. It never prices a counterfactual. That is not a limitation to work around; it is the line between Tier 1 and the tiers above it.

• It will not put a dollar figure on the gap. You will see that your water ratio sits above the cohort median. Pricing the distance means knowing what would close it — two sites with the same gap, one with an old boiler and one running a new one badly, need different answers and different money. That is Tier 2.
• It will not tell you where the water goes. One meter in, one number out. Splitting that into cooling, cleaning and product needs the process records the baseline audit reads — or sub-meters on the plant.
• It will not rank projects. No measures, no capital, no payback, no cost of carbon. Tiers 3 and 4.
• Monthly totals, not batches. It cannot tell you whether a good month was good practice or a favorable product mix.

What it asks of you is correspondingly small: a utility bill and a production number, once a month. Twelve months of bills is enough to start, and the rest of the platform is sitting in the same sidebar for the day your records can carry it.

Efficiency is the thread through all three. A plant that cuts liters per liter cuts its utility bill, tightens the number it has to budget for next year, and improves the intensity figure it reports — from one change, measured once. Treating those as three separate exercises is what makes each of them expensive.

For a plant with a part-time bookkeeper and no sustainability staff, the cost is rarely the calculation — it is assembling the inputs from scratch every time, then defending numbers nobody can retrace. So every figure carries the factor used, its publisher and its vintage, and traces back to a bill, a batch record or a published source. When someone asks where a number came from — and on a grant application, someone does — the answer is on the line itself.

• Cost per unit, and what to budget. What each resource line costs per unit produced today, and what the same volume costs at next year's tariff — the figure a budget actually needs.
• Resource-use intensity. Water, energy and gas per unit produced, against your own trend and published sector bands, so a change shows up as a change rather than as noise.
• Scope 1 and 2 with their working shown. Fuel combustion and purchased electricity from the same bills and production records the audit already reads, each line carrying its factor, publisher, vintage and period.
• Diversion accounting. Where the solid streams go, in the same ledger as the utilities — spent grain to a farm, stillage or trub to land application or digestion, packaging to recycling — as metric tons diverted against metric tons landfilled, which is the ratio the questionnaires ask for.
• Exports shaped for the thing that asked. An incentive application, a retail sustainability survey, a lender's file — rather than one PDF every recipient then asks you to re-cut.
• Scope 3 and the frameworks. The full GHG Protocol Scope 1/2/3 inventory is built in Tier 1; CSRD double materiality, SBTi targets and standards views are Tier 5 above.

Reporting tools tend to oversell, so these are the boundaries, stated plainly:

• Not third-party assurance. The platform produces an inventory and its working. It is not a verification opinion, and does not substitute for one where a program requires assured data.
• Not a substitute for a metered assessment. Bills and production records give real, defensible annual figures. They do not tell you which piece of equipment is responsible — that still takes meters on the plant.
• Not a claim generator. Numbers come out with their factors and periods attached. What you then put on a label or in marketing is your decision, and your regulatory risk.

Preview factors: EPA eGRID U.S. national average grid intensity and Canada's national grid intensity (NRCan/ECCC, most recent published year) for electricity; standard natural-gas combustion factors for gas. This preview does not separate Scope 3, does not use your own utility rate schedule, and is not suitable for a filing of any kind — it exists to show the shape of the full report.