Honest about what we measure
Estimated, documented, defensible.
We report estimated diversion based on disposal-stream sampling and partner-facility data, not state-certified scale weights at owned facilities. We say so on every report. For most ESG reporting frameworks, including GRI Standards, SASB, and CDP, our documentation provides defensible source data for diversion-by-weight, donation-by-category, and recycling-by-material-stream.
For customers operating under California SB 253/261 mandatory climate disclosure or SEC climate disclosure rules, we recommend evaluating whether estimated-versus-verified diversion meets your specific reporting standard before contracting. Some accounts prefer the asset-light estimated-diversion approach for cost reasons; others need scale-verified data and route accordingly. We tell you which one we are.
The honest framing is the more defensible one. We'd rather underclaim and meet the bar than overclaim and miss it.
How we compare to owned-facility competitors
Diversion data
Estimated through partner-facility sampling and routing logs
Weight verification
Disposal-facility weight tickets, not on-facility certified scales
Chain of custody
Photo documentation, manifest, partner-facility receipts
Brand-protected destruction
Chain-of-custody to certified disposal partner with documentation
Cost vs. owned-facility competitors
Typically 20-40% lower because no facility overhead pass-through
Dispatch speed
Typically faster: direct partner routing avoids centralized facility bottleneck
