Cool Farm Tool (CFT) comes up in conversations a lot at Proba. They deal with farm fertilizer emissions, just like Proba, and much more. But they're not doing the same thing. By the way, we’re an active Cool Farm Alliance member!
What Cool Farm Tool does well
CFT is a whole-farm emissions accounting tool. Put in your data for fertilizer, fuel, livestock, land use and it will give you a carbon footprint snapshot of the whole operation. Large all-encompassing tools such as CFT and Field to Market (FtM) are designed for practicability and reliability. To achieve that they have to rely on values (emission factors) which are conservative enough to not overreport in virtually all cases.
For in-field nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions, CFT uses IPCC 2019 Tier 1 emission factors. All synthetic fertilizers, urea, AN, CAN, UAN, collapse into one category, split only by climate: wet (1.6%) or dry (0.5%). When a nitrification inhibitor is selected, CFT applies a flat ~38% reduction to that baseline, taken from a 2010 global meta-analysis (Akiyama et al.). That reduction doesn't vary with soil, application method, N source, or inhibitor type, even though all of these change field performance.
The result is a generic but defensible number, fit for corporate Scope 3 inventories. It is not designed to quantify what a specific intervention actually delivered on a specific field, which is what credible insets and emerging standards (GHG Protocol AMI, SBTi FLAG) require.
Where Tier 1 has depth limitations
So, Cool Farm Tool gives you a broad snapshot of everything going on, but with the lack of precision in some intervention scenarios. That limitation shows up specifically when you're trying to quantify the effect of nitrogen stabilizers and precision fertilization practices.
Cool Farm Tool will ask whether nitrification inhibitors are in use and applies an adjustment. However, urease inhibitors, and their specific effect on ammonia loss and N₂O, aren't included. This is where Proba steps in.
How Proba fills that gap
Proba's PM.0004 methodology is built specifically around nitrogen stabilizers: both nitrification and urease inhibitors and their combinations. The emission factors come from published meta-analyses on inhibitor performance, governed through independent expert assessment and public consultation. The output is an auditable reduction figure that can enhance accurate emission reporting.
In practice, this means CFT reports and Proba certified emission reduction outcomes can be used together.
For example, working closely with a large potato grower from the US, CFT produces a whole-farm carbon footprint report, we re-assess emissions for the nitrogen stabilizer section, replacing the generic adjustment with a methodology-derived reduction. The CFT snapshot stays intact and Proba adds depth to where the nitrogen intervention is.
What this looks like in practice
For a farm applying 274 kg N/ha using CAN27, a baseline of 2,510 kg CO₂e/ha — switching to nitrification inhibitors:
|
Cool Farm Tool |
Proba |
|
|
Reported reduction |
-22.4% (475 kg CO₂e/ha) |
-49% (679 kg CO₂e/ha) |
A higher reduction does not mean an inflated number. PM.0004 is governed through independent expert assessment and public consultation, and the emission factors come from peer-reviewed meta-analyses on inhibitor performance. The reason Proba can report a larger reduction is that CFT's generic factor is conservative across all contexts. PM.0004 reflects what the specific intervention actually does.
The honest framing:
If the question is "what does this farming operation emit?" CFT is for you. If the question is "how do we quantify and verify the emission benefit of a specific nitrogen management practice in our supply chain?" That's a different question suited for Proba.
If you're working through nitrogen interventions in your supply chain, get in touch.