CarbonMeld CarbonMeld Carbon Observatory
Workbench ProjectsDevelopersComparePortfolioCCP trackerA–Z index
Re-assessment pendingGSBiogas - HeatIndiaRegistry: RegisteredGS-TPDDTEC

Prayas- A VER project for the rural communities in Uttarakhand

Developer: Society for the Upliftment of Villagers and Development of Himalayan Areas (SUVIDHA)

Methodology: GS-TPDDTEC (GS)

GS-687 ↗ · current registry ID: GS3971

Worked comparison example (English)

#405of 498 in Biogas#2483of 2759 in India#1950of 2179 in Gold Standard (GS)#403of 474 in GS-TPDDTEC

Score from methodology v2.1 (analysis of 5 Sep 2026). Re-assessment under v2.2 pending.

Assessment

CarbonMeld document-based assessment

01020304 Overall 4.2 / 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

Scored2026-09-05medium confidence

evidence: 23/25 registry documents analyzed · 4 red flags

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

How this analysis was made

Standard
Gold Standard (GS) How our current method reads projects of this standard
Methodology
Methodology for Animal Manure Management and Biogas Use for Thermal Energy Generation, Version 1.1; REDUCED EMISSIONS FROM COOKING AND HEATING: Technologies and Practices to Displace Decentralized v.4 How our current method reads projects of this type
Our method
CarbonMeld methodology v2.1 · analysed on 5 Sep 2026 · 23/25 registry documents analyzed · re-assessment under v2.2 pending

Analysis

The Prayas biogas and improved cookstove project in Uttarakhand has confirmed additionality via an investment test verified by the VVB, a quantified 5% leakage deduction, and no reported reversal events. However, the project delivered only about 20% of the pro-rata ex-ante expectation for the elapsed monitoring period, and the verification report lists over 30 material findings and 60+ corrective actions, many of which remain unaddressed. The extensive documentation quality issues, parameter inconsistencies across reporting periods, and absence of a buffer pool collectively limit confidence in the project's integrity and claim safety.

Red Flags

4 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 5 Sep 2026, marked “Re-assessment pending”. Per-dimension scores, risk indicators, 4 red flags, score factors, detailed analysis, and 25 registry documents (23 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)

    Pilot phase only (2021–2023)

    Eligible only for the pilot phase: not usable for the current 2024–2026 phase.

    Source: registry label · read on 4 Oct 2026

    Covers: credits of this project that carry the label on the registry — not every unit or lot

  • Integrity label (ICVCM CCP)

    Methodology approved for some versionsGS Methodology for Animal Manure

    The Integrity Council approved some versions of this protocol and not others: check which version the project uses before claiming CCP quality.

    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: registry label · read on 4 Oct 2026

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

  • Paris Agreement (Article 6)

    Not published

    This registry does not publish Article 6 authorizations.

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.

Registry labels last checked:2026-10-04

Credit Vintages

IssuedRetiredAvailable
2016
7067060
2017
8,8308,8300
2018
18,47918,4790
2019
25,35725,3570
2020
26,57026,5700
2021
26,47826,4780
2022
23,49523,277218
2023
17,31817,3180
2024
16,9689,2137,755
2025
12,209012,209
Total176,410156,22820,182

Retired by

Organisations named as beneficiaries in the registry's public retirement records.

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.