Where the implementations differ

Every row more than one implementation states, sorted by ratio, widest first. A difference is not an error. Competent teams rendering one method against different flow lists will differ, and most of these are modelling choices; the widest are worth a conversation, not a correction.

Published says what this list did about the row: `agreed` where they stated one number, `sole` where only one did, and nothing at all where the disagreement went to a queue instead.

Band All Incomparable 12 Outside tolerance 244 Within tolerance 450 Identical 36,242

Flow	Category	Place	European Commission — JRC	GreenDelta	ecoinvent Centre	Apart	Published
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	DE	-8,280.3	-8,280.3	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	DJ	-2,117.3	-2,117.3	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	DK	-7,007.2	-7,007.2	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	DM	-9,241.5	-9,241.5	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	DO	-7,226.2	-7,226.2	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	DZ	-4,788.8	-4,788.8	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	EC	-9,778.9	-9,778.9	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	EE	-6,555.1	-6,555.1	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	EG	-4,195	-4,195	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	ER	-3,674.6	-3,674.6	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	ES	-6,352.3	-6,352.3	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	ES-CA	-6,953	-6,953	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	ET	-4,257.6	-4,257.6	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	FI	-5,747.3	-5,747.3	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	FJ	-8,645.6	-8,645.6	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	FK	-6,009	-6,009	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	FO	-10,728	-10,728	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	FR	-10,623	-10,623	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	GA	-9,251	-9,251	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	GB	-9,490.8	-9,490.8	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	GD	-8,858.3	-8,858.3	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	GE	-8,697.5	-8,697.5	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	GF	-8,658.4	-8,658.4	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	GG	-8,440.8	-8,440.8	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	GH	-6,363.3	-6,363.3	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	GI	-5,579.1	-5,579.1	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	GL	-2,519.3	-2,519.3	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	GM	-3,623.8	-3,623.8	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	GN	-9,121.9	-9,121.9	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	GP	-7,614.3	-7,614.3	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	GQ	-9,242.8	-9,242.8	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	GR	-7,519.3	-7,519.3	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	GT	-8,971	-8,971	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	GW	-8,563.8	-8,563.8	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	GY	-9,249.9	-9,249.9	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	HN	-9,757.7	-9,757.7	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	HR	-11,529	-11,529	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	HT	-8,278.3	-8,278.3	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	HU	-5,682.4	-5,682.4	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	ID	-9,235.7	-9,235.7	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	IE	-12,464	-12,464	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	IL	-3,108.8	-3,108.8	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	IM	-9,700.4	-9,700.4	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	IN	-6,479.6	-6,479.6	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	IQ	-1,163.9	-1,163.9	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	IR	-3,493.9	-3,493.9	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	IS	-10,444	-10,444	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	IT	-8,207.4	-8,207.4	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	JE	-10,463	-10,463	—	1.0000× identical	sole
From industrial area Land Use → Transformation	Land use EF 3.1	JM	-8,815.6	-8,815.6	—	1.0000× identical	sole