CarbonMeld CarbonMeld Carbon Observatory
Workbench ProjectsDevelopersComparePortfolioCCP trackerA–Z index
Re-assessment pendingVCSEnergy industries (renewable/non-renewable sources); Waste handling and disposalChinaRegistry: RegisteredACM0001

Luoding BCCY New Power CO., Ltd. MSW biogas to electricity generation project

Developer: Henan BCCY Environmental Energy CO.,LTD

Methodology: ACM0001 (CDM)

VCS-5203 ↗

Worked comparison example (English)

#173of 498 in Biogas#1342of 2787 in China#1009of 1615 in Verra (VCS)#123of 279 in ACM0001

Score from methodology v2.1 (analysis of 3 Sep 2026). Re-assessment under v2.2 pending.

Assessment

CarbonMeld document-based assessment

01020304 Overall 5.4 / 10
Integrity 🔒 Transparency 🔒 Claim Safety 🔒 Documentation 🔒
Dimension scores are locked — the faint arcs are empty tracks, not zero scores.

Scale 0–10 · method weights: integrity 35% · transparency 25% · claim safety 25% · documentation 15%.

Re-assessment pending · v2.1

Scored2026-09-03medium confidence

evidence: 9/9 registry documents analyzed · 3 red flags

Generated by CarbonMeld Analysis Pipeline · Methodology · Editorial Policy · About the System
Download Report (PDF)

How this analysis was made

Standard
Verra (VCS) How our current method reads projects of this standard
Methodology
ACM0001 How our current method reads projects of this type
Our method
CarbonMeld methodology v2.1 · analysed on 3 Sep 2026 · 9/9 registry documents analyzed · re-assessment under v2.2 pending

Analysis

A registered VCS biogas-to-electricity project in China with a confirmed combined additionality test and measured project-specific baseline, but hampered by eight material findings requiring corrective action, a thin 0% leakage justification, and several key parameters (FNRB, usage rate, feedstock sustainability) not stated in the available record. The project is functional and verified by a reputable VVB, but the documentation quality gaps and missing permanence safeguards (no buffer pool stated) limit confidence in long-term credit integrity.

Red Flags

3 red flags detected — Unlock with Premium

Findings

Risk Indicators

Additionality

🔒

Permanence

🔒

Leakage

🔒

Baseline

🔒

Safeguards

🔒

Double-claim

🔒

Risk indicator details are a Premium feature

Score Breakdown

Score factors per dimension are a Premium feature — Unlock with Premium

Gates applied

The gates applied to this score are a Premium feature — Unlock with Premium

Detailed Analysis

The detailed per-dimension analysis is a Premium feature — Unlock with Premium

Evidence

Unlock the full analysis

On this page: the analysis of 3 Sep 2026, marked “Re-assessment pending”. Per-dimension scores, risk indicators, 3 red flags, score factors, detailed analysis, and 9 registry documents (9 analyzed).

€9+ VAT per month · card subscription, renews automatically until you cancel

Every rated project, PDF reports, API access, portfolio alerts and per-dimension scores with red-flag details in side-by-side comparisons (public-data comparison is free; fair use: 30 projects per day). Cancel any time from your account page. Crypto: $9 for one month, no automatic renewal.

Price + VAT · By subscribing or paying you accept the Terms of Use — the card subscription renews every month until you cancel; digital content, no refunds. How Premium works

Eligibility & market

What can you claim with this credit?

Four checks buyers ask about, from the registry and the Integrity Council (ICVCM).

  • Airlines (CORSIA)

    Not checked yet

    This registry publishes CORSIA labels, but CarbonMeld has not read this project's credit records yet: we cannot say whether its credits carry one. Check on the registry.

  • Integrity label (ICVCM CCP)

    Methodology approved by ICVCMACM0001

    The methodology meets the Core Carbon Principles; this project's credits do not carry the CCP label yet.

    Source: ICVCM assessment · ICVCM table read on 4 Oct 2026

    Covers: the methodology (every project using it), not this project's credits

  • Removal or reduction

    Emission reduction or avoidance

    Prevents or reduces emissions — fits contribution claims, not SBTi neutralisation.

    Source: project sector

    Covers: the project type, not a label on individual credits

  • Paris Agreement (Article 6)

    Not checked yet

    This registry publishes Article 6 authorizations, but CarbonMeld has not read this project's credit records yet: we cannot say whether any credits are authorized. Check on the registry.

Information only, from public sources. Claim rules (CORSIA, SBTi, EU rules on green claims) change: check them before making a public claim. Since 27 September 2026, EU consumer rules do not allow “climate neutral” product claims based on offsets.

Credit Vintages

No issuances recorded on the registry.

Methodology versions used

The methodology version stated in each monitoring, verification and issuance document, by period, compared with the official methodology pages.

  1. 2022–2024ACM0001 v19.0current version

    monitoring report + verification report

    official page · verified on

    in the ICVCM CCP-approved range (VCS: 15.0-19.0) · official page · verified on

  • ACM0001: Active (CDM / UNFCCC) · official page · verified on

Being within an ICVCM-approved version range is information only: it does not mean these credits carry the CCP label, which the registry assigns to each issuance.

A version is shown only when the document's own text writes it next to the methodology code. Current versions, status and CCP ranges come from the official pages linked, checked on the date shown.

Documents on the registry

Where to buy

Got an offer for these credits? Check it against the registry →

+ Know where to buy this?

Listing multiple projects? Send us a CSV at [email protected].

⚑ Dispute this rating

Profile & governance

Methodology·Editorial Policy·About the System

Are you the project owner?

Metadata correction (free)

Name, country, marketplace or links incorrect? Let us know.

Does not modify the score.

[email protected] →

Contest this rating

Something wrong in the analysis, or a registry document we have not used? Send us the link to the public source: you get a reference and an answer within 30 days.

Contest this rating →

Similar projects

Same methodology or sector, the same registry first.