Integrity cap max 7.5
Integrity at most 7.5 when no verification report was read, or when the project's own additionality demonstration is not confirmed. CM-E-CAP-INTEGRITY-ADDITIONALITY CM-E-CAP-INTEGRITY-NO-VERIFICATION
Carbon Credit Rating Methodology
CarbonMeld gives each project a score from 0 to 10, built from the project's public registry documents and registry records. The score has four dimensions. This page describes how each one is read and limited, which rules apply, and since which version.
- 4dimensions in every score
- 1,703rules applied, each with its ID
- 384methodologies covered
- 24issuers of those methodologies
How a Score Is Made
- Documents The registry's records and the project's public documents
- Facts Values read one at a time, each kept only with its quoted passage
- Scores Four dimensions, each from 0 to 10, against the project's own methodology
- Gates Sector deductions, then caps, then the overall score
- Published page Each new text checked against the facts before it is published
How Assessments Are Produced (v2.2, October 2026)
In version 2.2 every project is assessed against the official text of its own methodology. For each methodology and protocol (from CDM, Verra, Gold Standard, ACR, Climate Action Reserve, Puro, Isometric, J-Credit, the UK codes and others) the CarbonMeld team has written evaluation rules from the official methodology document: which criteria apply to that methodology, and which official reference values it sets, each tied to the page of the official text.
What is compared. Three of a project's figures are compared with its own methodology's values, each line citing the methodology: the annual emission reductions with the small-scale limit (within or above; in a programme of activities and in a grouped project the limit applies to each component activity or instance, and the total of the programme or the group is not compared with it) CM-C-SMALL-SCALE-LIMIT; the buffer share with the methodology's share for its version (side by side, and «below that minimum» where the methodology sets a minimum) CM-C-BUFFER-SHARE; and the length of the crediting period (within or not within; a rule in force from a given date is not applied to a period that began before it, and a rule the methodology calls approximate is shown side by side without a verdict) CM-C-CREDITING-LENGTH. The US forest protocols' reversal rule is quoted with its section and page. Since 6 Nov 2026, the fNRB is compared too, where the methodology allows a default fNRB (cookstoves, biogas, water treatment and brick kilns). CarbonMeld shows it beside the country's official value (A6.4-AMT-009 v01.0) and its 30% uncertainty, where the country has one. CM-C-FNRB-OFFICIAL
Other values of the methodology help the analysis read the project's own figures: an emission factor read above the highest value the methodology allows (or a plausibility bound) is not printed CM-R-EF-BOUND; the baseline emissions are never printed as the estimate of the emission reductions CM-E-BASELINE-NOT-ESTIMATE; under the ODS protocols a ten-year period is read as the campaign's crediting window; under the orphan-well protocols a period of up to a year is read as the well plugging. The fNRB and the installed capacity on a page are the project's own figures, as its documents state them; they are not compared with the methodology's values.
- Facts first. Figures and findings are read from the project's own documents one value at a time, and a value is kept only when the quoted passage is found in the source pages. The published text is written from those verified facts.
- Dates as written. A date that a document gives only as a month and a year is printed as the month and the year; no day is added. CM-E-MONTH-ONLY-DATES
- Template text is not a project fact. The wording of a document template — a line that the documents of many developers share, or a form's edition line — is read neither as a fact of the project nor as the date of the document. CM-E-TEMPLATE-TEXT
- A programme's facts stay the programme's. A document of a whole programme of activities can state a fact, such as a crediting period, its renewal, a methodology or a validation body; our current method does not show such a fact as one unit's own. The programme's statements on additionality and on other registrations apply to every unit. CM-E-PROGRAMME-FACTS
- The type of an additionality argument. When the documents argue an investment barrier and neither the quoted passage nor its page and the pages beside it hold a calculation (an IRR, an NPV, a benchmark, a payback period), the argument is read as a barrier analysis, not as an investment analysis. CM-E-ADDITIONALITY-TYPE
- Methodology rules are internal. The rules themselves are working tools and are not published; new methodologies are added as they appear on the registries.
- Programme status from official sources. ICVCM CCP status is read from the ICVCM's published assessment table, per crediting programme and methodology version, and the table's date is shown.
- Limits applied in code. The score caps and floors listed below under «Score caps and floors» are applied by code, the same way for every v2.2 project.
- Checked before publication. Each new text is checked automatically against the verified facts; a text that does not pass is not published. CM-E-TEXT-CHECK
Which Version a Project Page Shows
Projects are re-analysed with the current version in batches. Each project page shows the version its score comes from: «Methodology v2.2 · analysed on …» beside a current score. When the documents of a project analysed under v2.2 change, the project is analysed again; meanwhile its score stays shown, marked «Re-assessment pending» with the date of its analysis. A project analysed under an earlier version (v2.1 or before) shows no score, because that score is not comparable with scores under the current method: its page says «Being reassessed under the current method» and shows the project's registry data, and the new analysis appears there once it is published. An archived project, or one whose score is withdrawn for review, has its own notice instead. Each rule on this page says which version applies it. Scores can move up or down at a re-analysis; the change is shown in the rankings.
Before a New Analysis Is Published
A new analysis is held for review instead of replacing the score online when the overall score falls by more than 1 point, or into a lower band, with nothing changed in the project's documents or registry record; or when it falls below the score online on a page whose documents were not all read. Pages that would print a private person's name are also held. This is a publication rule: it changes no score. CM-E-PUBLICATION-HOLD
A reader can release a held analysis after a check against the documents. The release covers that exact analysis only. CM-E-READER-RULING
Four Dimensions, Weights and Bands
- Integrity 35%
- Transparency 25%
- Claim safety 25%
- Documentation 15%
| Dimension | Weight | What is assessed |
|---|---|---|
| Integrity | 35% | Additionality, quality and conservatism of baseline, permanence risk, leakage |
| Transparency | 25% | Public availability of data, accessible MRV, public PDD, findable official registry record |
| Claim Safety | 25% | Greenwashing risk for the buyer, ICVCM CCP eligibility, the age of the credits' vintage. CORSIA labels are read and shown; not having one never lowers a score. |
| Documentation | 15% | Availability of PDD, monitoring reports, third-party verification reports |
overall = integrity × 0.35 + transparency × 0.25 + claim_safety × 0.25 + documentation × 0.15
The weights are the same in every sector and in both versions. Sectors differ through the rules of each methodology (v2.2) and through the sector penalty gates described below. CM-E-OVERALL-WEIGHTS
Score Bands
Each dimension is scored in these bands (scoring rubric 2.1, the same text for every project):
| Range | Meaning |
|---|---|
| 9 – 10 | Excellent, best practice — only with strong documentary evidence |
| 7 – 8 | Good: solid evidence, minor concerns |
| 4 – 6 | Mixed: some concerns, or limited evidence. A dimension with insufficient information is scored 4.0–5.0 CM-E-INSUFFICIENT-INFORMATION |
| 0 – 3 | Low: a serious problem the documents show (for example no additionality demonstration, an inflated baseline, no findable registry record) |
Evidence Scope and Confidence
Evidence scope says what the analysis could read. Confidence says how much weight the resulting score can bear. Both are computed by code from what was read, never by the AI model, and neither changes the score itself: a 6.8 with high confidence is not equivalent to a 6.8 with low confidence.
Evidence scope (v2.2)
| Scope | What it means |
|---|---|
| registry docs | At least one of the project's registry documents was read |
| registry only | No document was read; the registry's own records of the project (its issuance rows) were |
| marketplace-only | Neither: only a marketplace listing |
v2.1 analyses used three other values: Registry-grade, Partial and Marketplace-only.
Confidence (v2.2)
High: the project is at a verified stage, we read at least one monitoring or verification report of the project and at least 2 of its documents, and no rejected answer of the model counts against it. Since 6 Nov 2026, a rejected answer counts only when it leaves a fact of the analysis unsettled: an answer that gives a verification or a monitoring period with no amount does not count, nor one whose fact the analysis has from another source (another answer or document, the registry, or a rule of the methodology or the programme; for an amount, accepted amounts whose periods cover the rejected one's). Before, every rejected answer counted. Medium: at least 1 document read. Low: none read. The page shows the label these rules give, after the two steps below. CM-E-CONFIDENCE
The registry status gate caps confidence at «low» (rejected, withdrawn, not delivered). Stale monitoring data lowers confidence one level. An analysis made before this rule entered the current method (1 Nov 2026) keeps the confidence of its own analysis, except that a «high» resting on stale monitoring data is shown as «medium». CM-E-STALE-CONFIDENCE
v2.1 analyses derived confidence from the evidence scope, the gates' coverage and the vintage flag: high with verified registry documents and complete data, shown only once a full validation confirmed the analysis; medium with some documents absent or not recent; low with no registry documents, or with stale data and a medium base.
Standards and Methodologies Covered
CarbonMeld's catalogue holds 384 methodologies from 24 issuers. 349 of them have rules of their own; the others are read with the general rules. 10 standards also have rules of their own. Each methodology links to its own page.
By standard
| Standard or issuer | Methodologies | With rules of their own | Rules of the standard |
|---|---|---|---|
| CDM (UNFCCC) | 209 | 206 | 1 |
| Verra (VCS) | 54 | 37 | 1 |
| American Carbon Registry (ACR) | 22 | 17 | 0 |
| Climate Action Reserve (CAR) | 21 | 18 | 0 |
| Gold Standard (GS) | 15 | 12 | 1 |
| Label Bas-Carbone (LBC) | 14 | 13 | 0 |
| Isometric | 9 | 9 | 0 |
| Puro.earth (PUR) | 5 | 5 | 0 |
| BCarbon | 4 | 4 | 8 |
| California Air Resources Board | 4 | 4 | 0 |
| Global C-Sink | 3 | 3 | 0 |
| J-Credit | 3 | 3 | 0 |
| Oncra | 3 | 3 | 0 |
| Plan Vivo (PV) | 3 | 3 | 14 |
| City Forest Credits (CFC) | 2 | 2 | 15 |
| Global Carbon Registry (GCR) | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Ministry of the Environment, Japan (J-VER scheme) | 2 | 2 | 0 |
| Washington State Department of Ecology | 2 | 2 | 0 |
| ART TREES | 1 | 1 | 15 |
| Hemp Carbon Standard (HCS) | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Rainbow Standard | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Skógarkolefni (Forest Carbon Code), Land and Forest Iceland | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| UK Peatland Code (PC) | 1 | 1 | 17 |
| UK Woodland Carbon Code (WCC) | 1 | 1 | 17 |
| Other (no issuer in the catalogue) | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Universal Carbon Registry (UCR) | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 384 | 349 |
«Rules of the standard» are the rules listed for the standard as a whole; its page shows them. A standard is linked when it has a ranking.
By project type
- Energy efficiency and fuel switching 59
- Forests, wetlands and land use 57
- Agriculture and livestock 41
- Electricity and heat generation 38
- Waste and wastewater 38
- Industry and materials 36
- Transport and transport fuels 22
- Carbon removal and storage 21
- Oil, gas and mine methane 18
- Industrial gases and refrigerants 18
- Cooking, household energy and water 15
- Not yet classified 21
The types group the catalogue's activity field. «Not yet classified»: the catalogue gives no activity for the methodology yet.
Every methodology
Each list is closed until opened. A methodology marked «general rules only» has no rule of its own.
CDM (UNFCCC) 209 methodologies
Other standards, Verra among them, also accept CDM methodologies; each one is listed once, under the CDM. the standard's page
ACM0001Flaring or use of landfill gasACM0002Grid-connected electricity generation from renewable sourcesACM0003Partial substitution of fossil fuels in cement or quicklime manufactureACM0004Consolidated methodology for waste gas and/or heat for power generationACM0005Increasing the blend in cement productionACM0006Electricity and heat generation from biomassACM0007Conversion from single cycle to combined cycle power generationACM0008Abatement of methane from coal minesACM0009Fuel switching from coal or petroleum fuel to natural gasACM0010GHG emission reductions from manure management systemsACM0011Fuel switching from coal and/or petroleum fuels to natural gas in existing power plants for electricity generationACM0012Waste energy recoveryACM0013Construction and operation of new grid connected fossil fuel fired power plants using a less GHG intensive technologyACM0014Treatment of wastewaterACM0015Emission reductions from raw material switch in clinker productionACM0016Mass Rapid Transit ProjectsACM0017Production of biofuelACM0018Electricity generation from biomass in power-only plantsACM0019N2O abatement from nitric acid productionACM0020Co-firing of biomass residues for heat generation and/or electricity generation in grid connected power plantsACM0021Reduction of emissions from charcoal production by improved kiln design and/or abatement of methaneACM0022Alternative waste treatment processesACM0024Natural gas substitution by biogenic methane produced from the anaerobic digestion of organic wasteACM0025Construction of a new natural gas power plantACM0026Fossil fuel based cogeneration for identified recipient facility(ies)AM0001Decomposition of fluoroform (HFC-23) waste streamsAM0002Landfill gas capture and flaring where the baseline is established by a public concession contractAM0003Simplified financial analysis for landfill gas capture projectsAM0004Grid-connected biomass power generation that avoids uncontrolled burning of biomassAM0005Small grid-connected zero-emissions renewable electricity generationAM0006GHG emission reductions from manure management systemsAM0007Analysis of the least-cost fuel option for seasonally-operating biomass cogeneration plantsAM0008Industrial fuel switching from coal and petroleum fuels to natural gas without extension of capacity and lifetime of the facilityAM0009Recovery and utilization of gas from oil fields that would otherwise be flared or ventedAM0010Landfill gas capture and electricity generation projects where landfill gas capture is not mandated by lawAM0011Landfill gas recovery with electricity generation and no capture or destruction of methane in the baseline scenarioAM0012Biomethanation of municipal solid waste in India, using compliance with MSW rulesAM0013Avoided methane emissions from organic waste-water treatmentAM0014Fossil fuel based cogeneration for identified recipient facility(ies)AM0015Bagasse-based cogeneration connected to an electricity gridAM0016Greenhouse gas mitigation from improved animal waste management systems in confined animal feeding operationsAM0018Baseline methodology for steam optimization systemsAM0019Renewable energy projects replacing part of the electricity production of one single fossil fuel fired power plant that stands alone or supplies to a grid, excluding biomass projectsAM0021Baseline Methodology for decomposition of N2O from existing adipic acid production plantsAM0022Avoided Wastewater and On-site Energy Use Emissions in the Industrial SectorAM0023Leak detection and repair in gas production, processing, transmission, storage and distribution systems and in refinery facilitiesAM0024Baseline methodology for greenhouse gas reductions through waste heat recovery and utilization for power generation at cement plantsAM0025Alternative waste treatment processesAM0026Methodology for zero-emissions grid-connected electricity generation from renewable sources in Chile or in countries with merit order based dispatch gridAM0027Substitution of CO2 from fossil or mineral origin by CO2 from biogenic residual sources in the production of inorganic compoundsAM0028N2O destruction in the tail gas of Caprolactam production plantsAM0029Baseline Methodology for Grid Connected Electricity Generation Plants using Natural GasAM0030PFC emission reductions from anode effect mitigation at primary aluminium smelting facilitiesAM0031Bus rapid transit projectsAM0032Methodology for waste gas or waste heat based cogeneration systemAM0033Use of non-carbonated calcium sources in the raw mix for cement processingAM0034Catalytic reduction of N2O inside the ammonia burner of nitric acid plantsAM0035SF6 emission reductions in electrical gridsAM0036Use of biomass in heat generation equipmentAM0037Flare (or vent) reduction and utilization of gas from oil wells as a feedstockAM0038Methodology for improved electrical energy efficiency of an existing submerged electric arc furnace used for the production of silicon and ferro alloysAM0039Methane emissions reduction from organic waste water and bioorganic solid waste using co-compostingAM0040Baseline and monitoring methodology for project activities using alternative raw materials that contain carbonates in clinker manufacturing in cement kilnsAM0041Mitigation of Methane Emissions in the Wood Carbonization Activity for Charcoal ProductionAM0042Grid-connected electricity generation using biomass from newly developed dedicated plantationsAM0043Leak reduction from a natural gas distribution grid by replacing old cast iron pipes or steel pipes without cathodic protection with polyethylene pipesAM0044Energy efficiency improvement projects - boiler rehabilitation or replacement in industrial and district heating sectorsAM0045Grid connection of isolated electricity systemsAM0046Distribution of efficient light bulbs to householdsAM0047Production of biodiesel based on waste oils and/or waste fats from biogenic origin for use as fuelAM0048New cogeneration project activities supplying electricity and heat to multiple customersAM0049Methodology for gas based energy generation in an industrial facilityAM0050Feed switch in integrated Ammonia-urea manufacturing industryAM0051Secondary catalytic N2O destruction in nitric acid plantsAM0052Increased electricity generation from existing hydropower stations through Decision Support System optimizationAM0055Recovery and utilization of waste gas in refinery or gas plantAM0056Efficiency improvement by boiler replacement or rehabilitation and optional fuel switch in fossil fuel-fired steam boiler systemsAM0057Avoided emissions from biomass wastes through use as feed stock in pulp and paper, cardboard, fibreboard or bio-oil productionAM0058Introduction of a district heating systemAM0059Reduction in GHGs emission from primary aluminium smeltersAM0060Power saving through replacement by energy efficient chillersAM0061Methodology for rehabilitation and/or energy efficiency improvement in existing power plantsAM0062Energy efficiency improvements of a power plant through retrofitting turbinesAM0063Recovery of CO2 from tail gas in industrial facilities to substitute the use of fossil fuels for production of CO2AM0064Capture and utilisation or destruction of mine methane (excluding coal mines) or non mine methaneAM0065Replacement of SF6 with alternate cover gas in the magnesium industryAM0066GHG emission reductions through waste heat utilisation for pre-heating of raw materials in sponge iron manufacturing processAM0067Methodology for installation of energy efficient transformers in a power distribution gridAM0069Biogenic methane use as feedstock and fuel for town gas productionAM0070Manufacturing of energy efficient domestic refrigeratorsAM0072Fossil Fuel Displacement by Geothermal Resources for Space HeatingAM0073GHG emission reductions through multi-site manure collection and treatment in a central plantAM0074Methodology for new grid connected power plants using permeate gas previously flared and/or ventedAM0077Recovery of gas from oil wells that would otherwise be vented or flared and its delivery to specific end-usersAM0078Point of Use Abatement Device to Reduce SF6 emissions in LCD Manufacturing OperationsAM0079Recovery of SF6 from Gas insulated electrical equipment in testing facilitiesAM0080Mitigation of greenhouse gases emissions with treatment of wastewater in aerobic wastewater treatment plantsAM0082Use of charcoal from planted renewable biomass in a new iron ore reduction systemAM0083Avoidance of landfill gas emissions by in-situ aeration of landfillsAM0084Installation of cogeneration system supplying electricity and chilled water to new and existing consumersAM0086Distribution of low greenhouse gas emitting water purification systems for safe drinking water general rules onlyAM0088Air separation using cryogenic energy recovered from the vaporization of LNGAM0090Modal shift in transportation of cargo from road transportation to water or rail transportationAM0092Substitution of PFC gases for cleaning Chemical Vapour Deposition (CVD) reactors in the semiconductor industryAM0097Installation of high voltage direct current power transmission lineAM0099Installation of a new natural gas fired gas turbine to an existing CHP plantAM0102Greenfield cogeneration facility supplying electricity and steam to a Greenfield Industrial Consumer and exporting excess electricity to a grid and/or project customer(s)AM0103Renewable energy power generation in isolated gridsAM0104Interconnection of electricity grids in countries with economic merit order dispatchAM0107New natural gas based cogeneration plantAM0109Introduction of hot supply of Direct Reduced Iron in Electric Arc FurnacesAM0110Modal shift in transportation of liquid fuels general rules onlyAM0117Introduction of a new district cooling systemAM0120Energy-efficient refrigerators and air-conditionersAM0123Renewable energy generation for captive useAMS-I.AElectricity generation by the userAMS-I.BMechanical energy for the user with or without electrical energyAMS-I.CThermal energy production with or without electricityAMS-I.DGrid connected renewable electricity generationAMS-I.ESwitch from non-renewable biomass for thermal applications by the userAMS-I.FRenewable electricity generation for captive use and mini-gridAMS-I.IBiogas/biomass thermal applications for households/small usersAMS-I.JSolar water heating systems (SWH)AMS-I.KSolar cookers for householdsAMS-I.LElectrification of rural communities using renewable energyAMS-II.ASupply side energy efficiency improvements – transmission and distributionAMS-II.BSupply side energy efficiency improvements – generationAMS-II.CDemand-side energy efficiency activities for specific technologiesAMS-II.DEnergy efficiency and fuel switching measures for industrial facilitiesAMS-II.EEnergy efficiency and fuel switching measures for buildingsAMS-II.FEnergy efficiency and fuel switching measures for agricultural facilities and activitiesAMS-II.GEnergy efficiency measures in thermal applications of non-renewable biomassAMS-II.HEnergy efficiency measures through centralization of utility provisions of an industrial facilityAMS-II.JDemand-side activities for efficient lighting technologiesAMS-II.KInstallation of co-generation or tri-generation systems supplying energy to commercial buildingAMS-II.LDemand-side activities for efficient outdoor and street lighting technologiesAMS-II.MDemand-side energy efficiency activities for installation of low-flow hot water savings devicesAMS-II.QEnergy efficiency and/or energy supply projects in commercial buildingsAMS-II.SEnergy efficiency in motor systemsAMS-III.AOffsetting of synthetic nitrogen fertilizers by inoculant application in legumes-grass rotations on acidic soils on existing croplandAMS-III.ADEmission reductions in hydraulic lime productionAMS-III.AEEnergy efficiency and renewable energy measures in new residential buildingsAMS-III.AFAvoidance of methane emissions through excavating and composting of partially decayed municipal solid waste (MSW)AMS-III.AGSwitching from high carbon intensive grid electricity to low carbon intensive fossil fuelAMS-III.AHShift from high carbon-intensive fuel mix ratio to low carbon-intensive fuel mix ratioAMS-III.AJRecovery and recycling of materials from solid wastesAMS-III.AKBiodiesel production and use for transport applicationsAMS-III.ALConversion from single cycle to combined cycle power generationAMS-III.AMFossil fuel switch in a cogeneration/trigeneration systemAMS-III.ANFossil fuel switch in existing manufacturing industriesAMS-III.AOMethane recovery through controlled anaerobic digestionAMS-III.AQIntroduction of Bio-CNG in transportation applicationsAMS-III.ARSubstituting fossil fuel based lighting with LED/CFL lighting systemsAMS-III.ASSwitch from fossil fuel to biomass in existing manufacturing facilities for non-energy applicationsAMS-III.ATTransportation energy efficiency activities installing digital tachograph systems to commercial freight transport fleetsAMS-III.AUMethane emission reduction by adjusted water management practice in rice cultivationAMS-III.AVLow greenhouse gas emitting safe drinking water production systemsAMS-III.AWElectrification of rural communities by grid extensionAMS-III.AXMethane oxidation layer (MOL) for solid waste disposal sitesAMS-III.AYIntroduction of LNG buses to existing and new bus routesAMS-III.BSwitching fossil fuelsAMS-III.BARecovery and recycling of materials from E-wasteAMS-III.BBElectrification of communities through grid extension or construction of new mini-gridsAMS-III.BCEmission reductions through improved efficiency of vehicle fleetsAMS-III.BDGHG emission reduction due to supply of molten metal instead of ingots for aluminium castingsAMS-III.BFReduction of N2O emissions from use of Nitrogen Use Efficient (NUE) seeds that require less fertilizer applicationAMS-III.BGEmission reduction through sustainable charcoal production and consumption general rules onlyAMS-III.BIFlare gas recovery in gas treating facilitiesAMS-III.BKStrategic feed supplementation in smallholder dairy sector to increase productivityAMS-III.BLIntegrated methodology for electrification of communitiesAMS-III.BMLightweight two and three wheeled personal transportationAMS-III.CEmission reductions by electric and hybrid vehiclesAMS-III.DMethane recovery in animal manure management systemsAMS-III.EAvoidance of methane production from decay of biomass through controlled combustion, gasification or mechanical/thermal treatmentAMS-III.FAvoidance of methane emissions through compostingAMS-III.GLandfill methane recoveryAMS-III.HMethane recovery in wastewater treatmentAMS-III.IAvoidance of methane production in wastewater treatment through replacement of anaerobic systems by aerobic systemsAMS-III.JAvoidance of fossil fuel combustion for carbon dioxide production to be used as raw material for industrial processesAMS-III.KAvoidance of methane release from charcoal productionAMS-III.LAvoidance of methane production from biomass decay through controlled pyrolysisAMS-III.MReduction in consumption of electricity by recovering soda from paper manufacturing processAMS-III.NAvoidance of HFC emissions in Poly Urethane Foam (PUF) manufacturingAMS-III.PRecovery and utilization of waste gas in refinery facilitiesAMS-III.QWaste energy recoveryAMS-III.RMethane recovery from livestock and manure management at households and small farmsAMS-III.SIntroduction of low-emission vehicles/technologies to commercial vehicle fleetsAMS-III.TPlant oil production and use for transport applicationsAMS-III.UCable Cars for Mass Rapid Transit System (MRTS)AMS-III.VDecrease of coke consumption in blast furnace by installing dust/sludge recycling system in steel worksAMS-III.XEnergy Efficiency and HFC-134a Recovery in Residential RefrigeratorsAMS-III.YMethane avoidance through separation of solids from wastewater or manure treatment systemsAMS-III.ZFuel Switch, process improvement and energy efficiency in brick manufactureAR-ACM0001Afforestation and reforestation of degraded landAR-ACM0002Afforestation or reforestation of degraded land without displacement of pre-project activitiesAR-ACM0003Afforestation and reforestation of lands except wetlandsAR-AM0001Reforestation of degraded landAR-AM0002Restoration of degraded lands through afforestation/reforestationAR-AM0003Afforestation and reforestation of degraded land through tree planting, assisted natural regeneration and control of animal grazingAR-AM0004Reforestation or afforestation of land currently under agricultural useAR-AM0005Afforestation and reforestation project activities implemented for industrial and/or commercial usesAR-AM0009Afforestation or reforestation on degraded land allowing for silvopastoral activitiesAR-AM0010Afforestation and reforestation project activities implemented on unmanaged grassland in reserve/protected areasAR-AM0012Afforestation or reforestation of degraded or abandoned agricultural landsAR-AM0014Afforestation and reforestation of degraded mangrove habitatsAR-AMS0001Simplified baseline and monitoring methodologies for small-scale A/R CDM project activities implemented on grasslands or croplands with limited displacement of pre-project activitiesAR-AMS0004Simplified baseline and monitoring methodology for small-scale agroforestry - afforestation and reforestation project activities under the clean development mechanismAR-AMS0005Simplified baseline and monitoring methodology for small-scale afforestation and reforestation project activities under the clean development mechanism implemented on lands having low inherent potential to support living biomassAR-AMS0007Afforestation and reforestation project activities implemented on lands other than wetlands
Verra (VCS) 54 methodologies
VM0001Refrigerant Leak Detection general rules onlyVM0003Methodology for Improved Forest Management through Extension of Rotation AgeVM0004Methodology for Avoided Planned Land Use Conversion in Peat Swamp ForestsVM0005Methodology for Conversion of Low-Productive Forest to High-Productive ForestVM0006Methodology for Carbon Accounting for Mosaic and Landscape-scale REDD ProjectsVM0007REDD+ Methodology Framework (REDD+MF)VM0008Weatherization of Single Family and Multi-Family BuildingsVM0009Methodology for Avoided Ecosystem ConversionVM0010Methodology for Improved Forest Management: Conversion from Logged to Protected ForestVM0011Methodology for Calculating GHG Benefits from Preventing Planned DegradationVM0012Improved Forest Management in Temperate and Boreal Forests (LtPF)VM0013Calculating Emission Reductions from Jet Engine Washing general rules onlyVM0014Interception and Destruction of Fugitive Methane from Coal Bed Methane (CBM) Seeps general rules onlyVM0015Methodology for Avoided Unplanned DeforestationVM0016Destruction of Ozone-Depleting Substances and HydrofluorocarbonsVM0017Adoption of Sustainable Agricultural Land ManagementVM0018Energy Efficiency and Solid Waste Diversion Activities within a Sustainable CommunityVM0019Fuel Switch from Gasoline to Ethanol in Flex-Fuel Vehicle FleetsVM0021Soil Carbon Quantification MethodologyVM0022Quantifying N2O Emissions Reductions in Agricultural Crops through Nitrogen Fertilizer Rate Reduction general rules onlyVM0023Reduction of GHG Emissions in Propylene Oxide Production general rules onlyVM0025Campus Clean Energy and Energy EfficiencyVM0026Methodology for Sustainable Grassland Management (SGM)VM0032Methodology for the Adoption of Sustainable Grasslands through Adjustment of Fire and GrazingVM0033Methodology for Tidal Wetland and Seagrass RestorationVM0034Canadian Forest Carbon Offset MethodologyVM0035Methodology for Improved Forest Management through Reduced Impact Logging general rules onlyVM0036Methodology for Rewetting Drained Temperate PeatlandsVM0037Methodology for Implementation of REDD+ Activities in Landscapes Affected by Mosaic Deforestation and DegradationVM0038Electric Vehicle Charging SystemsVM0039Methodology for Use of Foam Stabilized Base and Emulsion Asphalt Mixtures in Pavement ApplicationVM0040Methodology for Greenhouse Gas Capture and Utilization in Plastic Materials general rules onlyVM0041Methodology for the Reduction of Enteric Methane Emissions from Ruminants through the Use of Feed IngredientsVM0042Improved Agricultural Land ManagementVM0043CO2 Utilization in Concrete ProductionVM0044Biochar Utilization in Soil and Non-Soil ApplicationsVM0045Improved Forest Management Using Dynamic Matched Baselines from National Forest InventoriesVM0046Methodology for Reducing Food Loss and Waste general rules onlyVM0047Afforestation, Reforestation, and RevegetationVM0048Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest DegradationVM0049Carbon Capture and Storage general rules onlyVM0050Energy Efficiency and Fuel-Switch Measures in CookstovesVM0051Improved Management in Rice Production SystemsVMR0001Revisions to ACM0008 to Include Pre-drainage of Methane from an Active Open Cast Mine as a Methane Emission Reduction Activity general rules onlyVMR0002Revisions to ACM0008 to Include Methane Capture and Destruction from Abandoned Coal Mines general rules onlyVMR0006Energy Efficiency and Fuel Switch Measures in Thermal ApplicationsVMR0007Revision to AMS-III.AJ.: Recovery and Recycling of Materials from Solid WastesVMR0008Revision to AMS-III.BA.: Recovery and Recycling of Materials from E-wasteVMR0009Revision to AM0057: Avoided Emissions from Biomass Wastes through Use as Feedstock in Pulp and Paper, Cardboard, Fiberboard or Bio-oil Production general rules onlyVMR0012Production of Geopolymer Cement general rules onlyVMR0014Electric and Hybrid Vehicles and Mobile Machinery (AMS-III.C. Revision) general rules onlyVMR0015Revision to AMS-III.AV.: Low greenhouse gas emitting safe drinking water production systems general rules onlyVMR0016Flaring or Use of Landfill Gas (ACM0001 Revision) general rules onlyVMR0017Grid-connected electricity generation from renewable sources (ACM0002 Revision) general rules only
American Carbon Registry (ACR) 22 methodologies
ACR-ADV-REFRIGERATIONAdvanced Refrigeration SystemsACR-ANTI-IDLINGEmissions Reductions through Anti-Idling TechnologiesACR-AR-DEGRADEDAfforestation and Reforestation of Degraded LandsACR-CA-WETLANDSRestoration of California Deltaic and Coastal WetlandsACR-CCSCarbon Capture and Storage Projects general rules onlyACR-CMMCapturing and Destroying Methane from Coal and Trona Mines in North AmericaACR-EOREmission Reductions from Enhanced Oil Recovery general rules onlyACR-FOAM-BLOWINGTransition to Advanced Formulation Blowing Agents in Foam Manufacturing and UseACR-HFC-RECLAIMEDCertified Reclaimed HFC Refrigerants, Propellants, and Fire SuppressantsACR-IFM-CAImproved Forest Management (IFM) on Canadian ForestlandsACR-IFM-SNIPFImproved Forest Management (IFM) on Small Non-Industrial Private ForestlandsACR-IFM-USImproved Forest Management (IFM) on Non-Federal U.S. ForestlandsACR-LANDFILLLandfill Gas Destruction and Beneficial Use ProjectsACR-N2O-FERTILIZERReduced Use of Nitrogen Fertilizer on Agricultural CropsACR-ODS-HGWP-FOAMDestruction of Ozone Depleting Substances and High-GWP FoamACR-ODS-INTLDestruction of Ozone Depleting Substances from International SourcesACR-ORPHAN-WELLSPlugging Orphaned Oil and Gas WellsACR-PNEUMATICConversion of High-Bleed Pneumatic Controllers in Oil & Natural Gas Systems general rules onlyACR-POCOSINRestoration of Pocosin WetlandsACR-RICERice Management SystemsACR-TRANSFORMER-OILRecycling of Transformer Oil general rules onlyACR-TRUCK-STOPTruck Stop Electrification general rules only
Climate Action Reserve (CAR) 21 methodologies
CAR-AR-LIVESTOCKArgentina Livestock ProtocolCAR-ART5-ODSArticle 5 Ozone Depleting Substances ProtocolCAR-BIOCHARUS and Canada Biochar ProtocolCAR-CA-GRASSLANDCanada Grassland ProtocolCAR-CN-ADIPIC-ACIDChina Adipic Acid Production ProtocolCAR-MX-FORESTMexico Forest ProtocolCAR-MX-LANDFILLMexico Landfill ProtocolCAR-MX-LIVESTOCKMexico Livestock ProtocolCAR-NITROGEN-MGMTU.S. Nitrogen Management Project Protocol general rules onlyCAR-SOIL-ENRICHMENTUS Soil Enrichment ProtocolCAR-US-ADIPIC-ACIDU.S. Adipic Acid Production ProtocolCAR-US-CMMU.S. Coal Mine Methane Protocol general rules onlyCAR-US-COMPOSTINGU.S. Organic Waste Composting Protocol general rules onlyCAR-US-FORESTU.S. Forest ProtocolCAR-US-GRASSLANDU.S. Grassland ProtocolCAR-US-LANDFILLU.S. Landfill ProtocolCAR-US-LCCU.S. Low-Carbon Cement ProtocolCAR-US-LIVESTOCKU.S. Livestock ProtocolCAR-US-NITRIC-ACIDU.S. Nitric Acid Production ProtocolCAR-US-ODSU.S. Ozone Depleting Substances ProtocolCAR-US-OWDU.S. Organic Waste Digestion Protocol
Gold Standard (GS) 15 methodologies
GS-ANIMAL-WASTE-BIOGASMethodology for Animal Waste Management and Biogas Application general rules onlyGS-ARAfforestation – reforestation GHG emissions reductions & sequestration methodologyGS-AWMS-BIOGAS-THERMALAnimal Manure Management and Biogas Use for Thermal Energy Generation (AWMS)GS-BIODIESEL-WASTE-OILMethodology for Biodiesel from waste oil/fat from biogenic origin for use as fuelGS-BIODIGESTERBaseline and Monitoring Methodology for BiodigestersGS-COAL-IGNITIONProgramme, baseline and monitoring methodology for the introduction of an alternative ignition technique as measure to improve the energy efficiency of domestic coal firesGS-ICS-KRMethodology for Improved Cook-stoves and Kitchen RegimesGS-MMECDMetered & measured energy cooking devices (MECD)GS-MMS-MSWGHG Emission Reductions from Manure Management Systems and Municipal Solid WasteGS-RICE-AWDMethane Emission Reduction by adjusted Water management practice in rice cultivation general rules onlyGS-SAFE-WATEREmission reductions from Safe Drinking Water SupplyGS-SIMPLIFIED-COOKSTOVESSimplified Methodology for Clean and Efficient Cookstoves (SMEC)GS-SOC-FRAMEWORKSoil Organic Carbon Framework Methodology general rules onlyGS-TPDDTECReduced emissions from cooking and heating (RECH) (formerly TPDDTEC)GS-WASHWater Access and WASH Methodology
Label Bas-Carbone (LBC) 14 methodologies
LBC-BALIVAGEBalivageLBC-BATIMENT-NEUF-BIOSOURCEBâtiment neuf biosourcéLBC-BOISEMENTBoisementLBC-CARBONAGRICarbonAgriLBC-ECOMETHANEEcométhaneLBC-GFSCGestion Forestière à Stock ContinuLBC-GRANDES-CULTURESGrandes CulturesLBC-HAIESHaiesLBC-HERBIERS-POSIDONIEHerbiers de Posidonie general rules onlyLBC-PLANTATION-VERGERSPlantation de vergersLBC-REBOISEMENTReconstitution de peuplements forestiers dégradésLBC-RENOVATIONRénovationLBC-SOBACECO-TMMSobac'Eco-TMMLBC-VILLE-ARBOREEVille Arborée
Isometric 9 methodologies
ISOMETRIC-BICCSBiogenic Carbon Capture and StorageISOMETRIC-BIO-OIL-STORAGEBio-oil Geological StorageISOMETRIC-BIOCHARBiochar Production and StorageISOMETRIC-BIOMASS-STORAGEBiomass Geological StorageISOMETRIC-ENHANCED-WEATHERINGEnhanced Weathering in AgricultureISOMETRIC-REFORESTATIONReforestationISOMETRIC-RICE-METHANERice Methane ReductionISOMETRIC-SUBSURFACE-BIOMASSSubsurface Biomass Carbon Removal and StorageISOMETRIC-WASTEWATER-ALKALINITYWastewater Alkalinity Enhancement
Puro.earth (PUR) 5 methodologies
BCarbon 4 methodologies
California Air Resources Board 4 methodologies
Global C-Sink 3 methodologies
J-Credit 3 methodologies
Oncra 3 methodologies
City Forest Credits (CFC) 2 methodologies
Global Carbon Registry (GCR) 2 methodologies
GCR-CCC-PLUSgeneral rules onlyGCR-MARINE-COASTAL-CCSgeneral rules only
Ministry of the Environment, Japan (J-VER scheme) 2 methodologies
Washington State Department of Ecology 2 methodologies
ART TREES 1 methodology
Rainbow Standard 1 methodology
Skógarkolefni (Forest Carbon Code), Land and Forest Iceland 1 methodology
Other (no issuer in the catalogue) 1 methodology
AM0292general rules only
Official Sources Used
- Verra Registry (VCS), project page, issuance reports, PDD
- Gold Standard Registry, project page and documentation
- CDM Registry (UNFCCC), for CDM projects
- The other registries CarbonMeld follows (ACR, Climate Action Reserve, Puro, Isometric, J-Credit, the UK codes and others): their project records and documents
- The issuers of the methodologies CarbonMeld reads, at their official sites: CDM (UNFCCC), Verra (VCS), American Carbon Registry (ACR), Climate Action Reserve (CAR), Gold Standard (GS), Label Bas-Carbone (LBC), Isometric, Puro.earth (PUR), California Air Resources Board, Global C-Sink, J-Credit, Oncra, City Forest Credits (CFC), Ministry of the Environment, Japan (J-VER scheme), Washington State Department of Ecology, ART TREES, Hemp Carbon Standard (HCS), Rainbow Standard, Skógarkolefni (Forest Carbon Code), Land and Forest Iceland, UK Peatland Code (PC), UK Woodland Carbon Code (WCC)
- ICVCM: the published CCP assessment table
- CORSIA: the eligibility labels the registries themselves publish for each project, and what the project's documents state
- Marketplace metadata (ClimateTrade, Carbonmark, Toucan, and others)
We periodically cross-check our project coverage and our issued / retired totals against the Voluntary Registry Offsets Database (VROD), published by the Berkeley Carbon Trading Project at UC Berkeley. Small differences between our figures and the VROD are normal: they arise from the dates of each data pull, different registry coverage (the VROD covers fewer registries than CarbonMeld reads), and how cancelled or converted credits are counted.
Haya, B. K., Quartson, P., Bernard, T., Abayo, A., Rong, X., So, I. S., & Elias, M. (2026). Voluntary Registry Offsets Database, v2026-08. Berkeley Carbon Trading Project, University of California, Berkeley. gspp.berkeley.edu. Licensed under CC BY 4.0.
Scoring Rules, Caps and Gates
Each rule below carries its ID in our rules registry. The ID stays the same from version to version, so it can be cited: a link to the ID on this page opens the rule. A rule marked «planned» is not applied yet.
Score Caps and Floors (v2.2)
In v2.2 these limits of the bands are applied by code after the scorer has given its figures, the same way for every project. A cap is a ceiling: it lowers a figure above it and leaves a lower one as it is.
Integrity cap max 5.0
Integrity and Transparency at most 5.0 when no validation or verification report could be read: this is the rubric's «insufficient information» band. CM-E-INSUFFICIENT-INFORMATION
Transparency cap max 7.5
Transparency at most 7.5 when the registry publishes no issuance data for the project. CM-E-CAP-TRANSPARENCY-NO-ISSUANCE
Claim safety cap max 7.5
Claim Safety at most 7.5 when the programme has no CCP-approved methodology for the project (if the CCP label does not apply to the programme, as for a compliance programme, this condition does not apply), or when the credits' vintage is 5 years old or more. CM-E-CAP-CLAIM-SAFETY-CCP
Claim safety cap max 6.5
Claim Safety at most 6.5 when the ICVCM did not approve the methodology and the vintage is 5 years old or more. CM-E-CAP-CLAIM-SAFETY-NOT-CCP-OLD
Documentation cap max 6.5
Documentation at most 6.5 when credits have been issued but no monitoring or verification report could be read. CM-E-CAP-DOCUMENTATION-NO-REPORT
Documentation cap max 7.5
Documentation at most 7.5 unless a verification report was read and a monitoring or verification report is less than 2 years old: 8–10 needs both. CM-E-CAP-DOCUMENTATION-RECENT
Documentation shown min 4.0
Floors. In that band, Integrity and Transparency are at least 4.0 when no adverse fact was read and no sector deduction lowered that score. Documentation is at least 4.0 when a PDD and a validation, verification or monitoring report were read. CM-E-DOCUMENTATION-FLOOR
v2.1 analyses used the same bands as guidance to the scorer, without these limits in code.
Standing Rules for the Scorer (v2.2)
Claim safety shown
Under our current method, some facts never lower a score on their own: an ICVCM CCP status that is «pending» or «not assessed» (it only keeps a project out of the 8–10 band); a criterion the project's methodology marks as not applicable; a finding the documents leave undeterminable; and the absence of CORSIA eligibility. CM-E-NOT-APPLICABLE-NEVER-GAP CM-E-CCP-CLAIM-SAFETY
Integrity shown
Additionality given by the methodology itself — a positive list, a micro-scale rule, the protocol's own tests — is not marked down for lacking a project-level demonstration. CM-E-ADDITIONALITY-GIVEN
shown
Our reading limits never count against a project. When we could not read a document (a scan without text, a file that would not open), that gap bears on no dimension of the score. If the scorer's reasoning rests on it, the question is asked again; if it still does, the page is not published. CM-E-OWN-LIMITS
shown
Each dimension rests only on its own facts. When the scorer's reason for one dimension cites a fact that belongs to another dimension, the question is asked again without that fact. CM-E-DIMENSION-OWN-LINES
Sector Classification
Each project is automatically classified into one of the following sectors using a deterministic keyword-matching system. Classification is based on the project's credit type, name, and description — checked in that priority order. No AI model is involved in classification.
| Sector | Examples |
|---|---|
| redd | REDD+, avoided deforestation, forest protection |
| arr | Afforestation, reforestation, revegetation |
| cookstoves | Clean cooking, improved cookstoves, fuel-efficient stoves |
| biogas | Biogas digesters, biogas development |
| biomass | Biomass cogeneration, rice husk, bio-oil, wood pellet |
| renewable_energy | Wind, solar, hydro, geothermal, run-of-river |
| methane | Landfill gas, coal mine methane, methane destruction |
| biochar | Biochar production and application |
| dac | Direct air capture |
| blue_carbon | Mangroves, seagrass, saltmarsh, coastal wetlands |
| soil_carbon | Carbon farming, agroforestry, agricultural land management |
| water | Safe water access, water purification, boreholes |
| industrial | Energy efficiency, waste heat recovery, fuel switching, composting, waste-to-energy |
| other | Projects that do not match any of the above |
Each project page displays which sector classification was applied.
Combination Rules and Gates
The linear formula can be too lenient when one dimension has a serious problem. Gates are applied by code, after the scorer's figures; the order is given at the end of this section.
Universal gates
shown
Integrity gate
If Integrity is below 4.0, the overall score is capped at 6.0. A structural additionality problem cannot be masked by strong documentation.
Applied in v2.1 and in v2.2 analyses. CM-E-OVERALL-WEIGHTS
Transparency deduction −1.0
Documentation gate
If Documentation is below 3.0, the Transparency score is reduced by 1.0. In the band of insufficient information, the reduction stops at the band's floor of 4.0, unless a sector gate lowered transparency. Transparency depends partly on access to underlying documents. When documentation is severely limited, the transparency score is constrained accordingly.
Applied in v2.1 and in v2.2 analyses. CM-E-DOCUMENTATION-PENALTY
Integrity deduction −3.0
Registry status gate
When the registry lists the project as rejected, Integrity and Claim Safety are each reduced by 3.0; when it lists the project as withdrawn, or as not delivered, by 2.5. The registry status is shown first among the red flags, and the confidence is at most «low». Any other registry status changes no score: it is shown on the page.
Applied in v2.1 and in v2.2 analyses. CM-E-REGISTRY-STATUS
shown planned: not applied yet
VVB verification check
If the additionality test is present but not confirmed by a Validation/Verification Body, and the additionality semaphore is green, it is downgraded to yellow. This does not affect the numerical score.
Our current method does not apply it. Some earlier (v2.1) analyses applied it. CM-E-VVB-ADDITIONALITY-LIGHT
planned Link
Claim safety cap max 5.0
Legal-proceedings cap
When the project's own latest monitoring report states an ongoing criminal investigation or proceeding in which the project company is named as a suspect or defendant, Claim Safety is at most 5.0. It never affects Integrity. The cap is lifted when a later monitoring report states the case closed or dismissed. Insolvencies in which the project company is a creditor, civil disputes and closed cases do not trigger it. We rely only on what the project's documents disclose: some standards' forms ask about legal proceedings and others do not.
Applied in v2.2 analyses. CM-E-LEGAL-PROCEEDINGS-CAP
Sector-specific penalty gates
These gates apply additional penalties to projects in specific sectors where certain risks are structurally important. Each gate reads a fact from the project's documents. Gates that check for absent information only fire when project documents were read — a project with no documents read is not penalized for missing fields, and in v2.2 a gap counts only where the documents read do not address the point, never where the methodology's rules mark it not applicable.
Which version applies these gates. All of them apply to v2.1 analyses. In v2.2 they apply where the v2.2 analysis reads the fact (each gate below says so); the deduction comes before the score caps above, so a project is never penalised twice for one gap.
| Gate | Effect | Versions |
|---|---|---|
| Forest and land use — Leakage assessment If leakage is not addressed or not documented in available project documents, Integrity is reduced by 1.5 points. For REDD+ and ARR projects, the absence of any leakage documentation is treated as a structural red flag — unlike sectors such as biochar where leakage is not a primary concern. Our current method also applies it to wetland, peatland, grassland, soil carbon and Plan Vivo projects whose methodology requires a leakage assessment. It never applies to VM0033 and VM0036, which consider leakage absent under their conditions. At the listing stage, this gate does not apply when the programme's listing form has no section on leakage (the Climate Action Reserve's forest, grassland and soil enrichment forms, ACR's GHG Project Listing Form, Verra's draft project description for a listing as under development). It applies from the first stage whose required documents cover leakage. | Integrity deduction −1.5 | Applied in v2.1 and in v2.2 analyses. CM-G-LEAKAGE-NOT-ADDRESSED |
| Forest and land use — Buffer pool disclosure If the buffer pool percentage is not disclosed in available documents, a red flag is added. No score penalty is applied — the AI evaluator already factors buffer pool adequacy into its assessment. Our current method also applies it to wetland, peatland, grassland, soil carbon and Plan Vivo projects whose methodology requires a buffer. At the listing stage, no flag is added when the programme's listing form has no section on the buffer pool. | shown | Applied in v2.1 and in v2.2 analyses. CM-G-BUFFER-NOT-DISCLOSED |
| Gate | Effect | Versions |
|---|---|---|
| Avoided biomass — older default fNRB If the fraction of non-renewable biomass (fNRB) is an older CDM default value, Claim Safety is reduced by 1.0 point. Older defaults are the TOOL33 values before version 03.0, the older national defaults and any other value the documents give as a default, such as 0.8 or 0.9; such defaults overestimate fNRB in many regions. A current official value takes no deduction: CDM TOOL33 v03.0 (12 June 2025) and the Article 6.4 tool A6.4-AMT-009 (in force from 21 May 2026). An assessment with MoFuSS 2024 or later takes none either. The CDM fixed default of 0.3 (TOOL30, adopted at EB 97) is not an older default: this gate makes no deduction for it, and the next gate compares it with the official value like any other value. Where the documents do not show the source, there is no deduction. Our current method applies it to every project credited for avoided non-renewable biomass whose methodology allows a default fNRB: cookstoves (AMS-I.E among them), biogas (the Gold Standard methodology for manure biogas), water treatment (AMS-III.AV, the Gold Standard methodology for safe drinking water) and brick kilns (AMS-III.Z). Where the documents apply methodologies together (a bundle, such as AMS-I.C or AMS-III.R with AMS-I.E), the fNRB gates also apply to the bundle's fNRB part, and the reason names that part and its version. The Gold Standard methodology for small-scale biodigesters requires the project's own assessment, and VM0017 uses the fNRB only to deduct leakage, so neither takes it. | Claim safety deduction −1.0 | In the current method since 1 Nov 2026. Changed on 6 Nov 2026: older defaults only. CM-G-FNRB-NATIONAL-DEFAULT |
| Avoided biomass — fNRB above the official value CarbonMeld compares the project's fNRB with the official national value of its country in A6.4-AMT-009 v01.0 (Table 3; the same values as CDM TOOL33 v03.0). If the project's value is higher by more than the tool's uncertainty, 30% of the value (para 15), Claim Safety is reduced by 0.5 point, and by 1.0 point above 2× the official value. This does not apply to a value from TOOL33 v03.0 or the A6.4 tool, to an assessment with MoFuSS 2024 or later, or where the documents do not show the source. So a value whose source the documents do not show takes neither fNRB deduction, however far above the official value it is: a known gap of the current method. A page takes only one fNRB deduction, the larger one. Where the country has no national value, there is no comparison. Where the methodology discounts a calculated value (VM0050: 26%), CarbonMeld compares the value the project applies. Each page shows the project's value next to the official one. | Claim safety deduction −0.5 −1.0 above 2× the official value | In the current method since 6 Nov 2026. CM-G-FNRB-ABOVE-OFFICIAL |
| Avoided biomass — usage monitoring If usage monitoring is assumed or not stated (rather than measured through smart meters, surveys, or self-reporting), Claim Safety is reduced by 0.5 points. Our current method applies it to cookstoves, and to biogas and water treatment where the methodology asks for a usage or operation survey (AMS-III.R, AMS-I.I, the Gold Standard methodology for manure biogas, AMS-III.AV, the Gold Standard methodology for safe drinking water). The Gold Standard methodology for small-scale biodigesters measures the fuel that households use instead, so it takes no deduction. It does not apply before the first monitoring period. A usage check by the verifier, operation logs and the share of units still in operation count as usage monitoring. One fNRB gate and this gate can stack: together they reduce Claim Safety by at most 1.5. | Claim safety deduction −0.5 | Applied in v2.1 and in v2.2 analyses. CM-G-NO-USAGE-MONITORING |
| Gate | Effect | Versions |
|---|---|---|
| Renewable energy, power generation and supply — Additionality test If no additionality test type is documented, Integrity is reduced by 1.0 point. For renewable energy, power generation and supply projects, the absence of an additionality demonstration is the primary risk — unlike other sectors where a missing field may simply indicate incomplete document extraction. Our current method applies it to renewable energy projects, for power, heat or mechanical energy, and to the other power methodologies: grid connections, transmission lines and new gas plants (ACM0025, AM0029, AM0074). | Integrity deduction −1.0 | Applied in v2.1 and in v2.2 analyses. CM-G-ADDITIONALITY-TEST-NOT-STATED |
| Gate | Effect | Versions |
|---|---|---|
| Biochar — Permanence claim If the durability claim (in years) is not stated in available project documents, Integrity is reduced by 1.0 point and a red flag is added. For biochar, the permanence claim is the core of the credit's value proposition — its absence in otherwise available documents is a structural gap. | Integrity deduction −1.0 | Applied in v2.1 and in v2.2 analyses. CM-G-PERMANENCE-CLAIM-NOT-STATED |
| Biochar — End-use tracking If the end use of the biochar (soil application, construction materials, or other sinks) is documented as not tracked, Claim Safety is reduced by 1.0 point. | Claim safety deduction −1.0 | Applied in v2.1 and in v2.2 analyses. CM-G-END-USE-NOT-TRACKED |
| Biochar — Feedstock sustainability If feedstock sustainability is documented as not addressed, Claim Safety is reduced by 0.5 points and a red flag is added. | Claim safety deduction −0.5 | Applied in v2.1 and in v2.2 analyses. CM-G-FEEDSTOCK-NOT-ADDRESSED |
| Gate | Effect | Versions |
|---|---|---|
| Methane — Legally required capture If gas capture is legally mandated (e.g. landfill gas collection required by regulation), Integrity is reduced by 2.0 points and a red flag is added. Where capture is required by law, the additionality of carbon finance is in doubt. When the documents show that the baseline already deducts the legally required amount, so that only the amount beyond the law is credited, there is no reduction and no red flag: the page states the fact. CM-E-CAPTURE-IN-BASELINE | Integrity deduction −2.0 | Applied in v2.1 and in v2.2 analyses. CM-G-CAPTURE-LEGALLY-REQUIRED |
| Methane — Modeled baseline If the emissions baseline is modeled rather than measured, Claim Safety is reduced by 0.5 points. | Claim safety deduction planned: not applied yet −0.5 | Our current method does not apply it. Some earlier (v2.1) analyses of methane projects applied it. CM-G-METHANE-MODELED-BASELINE |
| Gate | Effect | Versions |
|---|---|---|
| DAC — Energy source If the capture process is powered by fossil energy, Integrity is reduced by 1.5 points. | Integrity deduction planned: not applied yet −1.5 | Our current method does not apply it. Some earlier (v2.1) analyses of DAC projects applied it. CM-G-DAC-FOSSIL-ENERGY |
| DAC — Lifecycle assessment If project documents state that no lifecycle assessment (LCA) exists, Claim Safety is reduced by 1.0 point. If available documents simply do not mention an LCA, a red flag is added without a score penalty. | Claim safety deduction planned: not applied yet −1.0 | Our current method does not apply it. CM-G-DAC-NO-LCA |
| DAC — Storage verification If CO₂ storage is documented as not independently verified, Integrity is reduced by 1.0 point. If available documents do not mention independent storage verification, a red flag is added without a score penalty. | Integrity deduction planned: not applied yet −1.0 | Our current method does not apply it. CM-G-DAC-STORAGE-NOT-VERIFIED |
Sectors not listed above (biomass, blue_carbon, soil_carbon, water, industrial, other) are classified for informational purposes and receive the universal gates only.
Order of application
v2.1: 1. the documentation gate, then the overall score, then the integrity gate; 2. the sector penalty gates one
after another, the overall score and the integrity gate recomputed after each; 3. every figure kept within 0–10.
v2.2: the scorer's figures, then the sector penalty gates, then the score caps, the
documentation gate and the floors, then the overall score with the integrity gate, then the registry status gate;
every figure kept within 0–10. CM-E-GATE-ORDER
Each project page lists the gates applied to its score under "Gates applied", in the Premium details: each gate's name and its deduction or cap.
Vintage Assessment
Each project receives a vintage flag from the age of its monitoring data. In v2.2 the date is the end of the latest verified monitoring period the documents print (else of the latest monitoring period), and a later vintage the registry has issued counts instead when there is one. v2.1 analyses used the latest year mentioned in the monitoring period. CM-E-VINTAGE-FLAG
| Flag | Condition | Effect |
|---|---|---|
| recent | Monitoring data less than 3 years old | No effect |
| aging | Monitoring data from 3 to under 5 years old | No effect on score |
| stale | Monitoring data 5 years old or more | Confidence one level lower (v2.1 and v2.2) CM-E-STALE-CONFIDENCE |
| unknown | No monitoring period in the documents | No penalty. v2.2 shows the period as unknown; v2.1 analyses treated the project as «recent» |
The vintage flag never changes the numerical score. The age of the credits' own vintage does: in v2.2 a vintage 5 years old or more caps Claim Safety (see «Score caps and floors»).
Semaphore Indicators
Each project has six risk indicators, each shown as a traffic-light signal beside the numerical score. In v2.2 a light is assessed where the project's methodology rules cover that risk; a light the analysis did not assess is grey («not assessed») and is never a judgement. Safeguards and leakage are grey on most v2.2 pages today.
| Indicator | What it measures |
|---|---|
| Additionality | Is there evidence the project would not have happened without carbon finance? |
| Permanence | How robust is the mechanism preventing reversal of emission reductions? |
| Leakage | Is emissions displacement outside the project boundary accounted for? |
| Baseline | Is the emissions baseline conservative and well-documented? |
| Safeguards | Are environmental and social safeguards in place and monitored? |
| Double-claim | Is there risk of the same reduction being claimed by multiple parties? |
What Would Improve
Each project assessment includes a «what would improve» field listing actions that could raise the project's score, such as publishing a more recent monitoring report. In v2.2 it is written from fixed templates for the gaps the analysis found, never by a model. In v2.1 analyses it was generated by the AI evaluator.
Versions and Governance
Version Log
| Version | Date | Changes |
|---|---|---|
| v2.2 | 2026-10-04 | Added: each project assessed against the official text of its own methodology (evaluation
rules per methodology and protocol, official values cited by page); facts verified against the source documents
one value at a time; ICVCM CCP status from the official assessment table; the rubric 2.1 score caps and floors
applied in code; the scorer's standing rules (CCP pending or not assessed is neutral, not applicable is never a
gap, no CORSIA label never lowers a score, methodology-given additionality is not marked down, our reading limits
bear on no dimension); the legal-proceedings cap; automatic checks before publication. Changed: confidence (from the documents read, see above); the vintage flag (end of the printed period, or a later issued vintage; «unknown» when there is none); evidence scope (registry docs / registry only / marketplace-only); «what would improve» written from fixed templates, not by a model. Not carried over: the VVB light check, the modeled-baseline gate and the three DAC gates (no reading of those facts yet). The other sector penalty gates and the stale-data confidence step were brought back on 1 Nov 2026. Unchanged: the four dimensions and their weights, the integrity gate, the documentation gate, the sector classification, the registry status gate. |
| v2.1 | 2026-08-22 | Sector-specific penalty gates extended to biochar (permanence claim, end-use tracking, feedstock sustainability), methane (legally mandated capture, modeled-only baseline), and DAC (fossil energy source, lifecycle assessment, storage verification). Extraction schema extended from 40 to 49 structured fields. |
| v2.0 | 2026-03-29 | Sector classification (14 sectors). Sector-specific penalty gates for REDD+/ARR, cookstoves/biogas, and renewable energy. Vintage assessment with confidence downgrade. Semaphore indicators documented. "What would improve" field documented. |
| v1.0 | 2026-03-16 | First public version. 4 dimensions, weights 35/25/25/15, Integrity gate and Documentation gate. |
Rule Changes
Every change to a rule of our method, newest first, as our rules registry records it, with the day the change was introduced.
Governance
The scores published in the database are generated by a standardized pipeline applied to documentary inputs. Commercial relationships and paid access do not modify the methodology criteria and do not guarantee specific results for any project.
Methodology updates are versioned and logged above. New analyses use the current version; each project page shows the version of its own analysis (see «Which Version a Project Page Shows»).
See also: Editorial Policy · About the System
What Is Not Considered
- Market price — the score does not account for the credit price
- Buyer or seller reputation
- Unofficial third-party opinions or reviews
- Non-public communications with project developers
- On-chain transaction history for tokenised credits
A score is not a certification, financial recommendation, or guarantee of environmental outcome.
Previous Methodology Versions
v2.1 — General Methodology (2026-08-22)
The scoring criteria of v2.1 are the ones described on this page. v2.2 keeps its framework; each rule on this page says which version applies it. The other difference is the evidence process (see «How Assessments Are Produced»). Projects analysed under v2.1 show no score until their new analysis under v2.2 is published; their pages say «Being reassessed under the current method» and show the registry data (an archived project, or one whose score is withdrawn for review, has its own notice).
v2.0 — General Methodology (2026-03-29)
Overview
Version 2.0 introduced sector classification (14 sectors) and the first sector-specific penalty gates, on top of the universal scoring framework inherited from v1.0.
Sector Gates in v2.0
Sector-specific penalty gates applied only to REDD+/ARR (leakage assessment, buffer pool disclosure), cookstoves/biogas (fNRB methodology, usage monitoring), and renewable energy (additionality test). Biochar, methane, and DAC projects were classified but received the universal gates only.
What Changed in v2.1
- Penalty gates extended to biochar (permanence claim, end-use tracking, feedstock sustainability)
- Penalty gates extended to methane (legally mandated capture, modeled-only baseline)
- Penalty gates extended to DAC (fossil energy source, lifecycle assessment, storage verification)
- Extraction schema extended from 40 to 49 structured fields
v1.0 — General Methodology (2026-03-16)
Overview
Version 1.0 used a common rubric for all project types. This was a deliberate choice to ensure comparability, but introduced limitations: sector-specific risks were underrepresented.
Dimensions and Weights
Identical to v2.0: Integrity (35%), Transparency (25%), Claim Safety (25%), Documentation (15%).
Gates
Only two universal gates were applied. No sector-specific gates existed.
Integrity gate
If Integrity below 4.0, overall capped at 6.0.
Documentation gate
If Documentation below 3.0, Transparency reduced by 1.0.
Hard and Discretionary Criteria
Hard criteria were objectively verifiable conditions with a defined weight: public PDD present limits Documentation ceiling; third-party verification report limits Documentation ceiling; findable registry record is positive for Transparency; CORSIA eligibility is positive for Claim Safety. Discretionary criteria — baseline quality, additionality strength, permanence risk, leakage quantification — were evaluative and did not express as fixed increments.
Project Types and Limitations
| Project type | Primary undifferentiated risk |
|---|---|
| REDD+ / Forest Carbon | Permanence is critical; weight did not fully capture sector specificity |
| ARR (Afforestation/Reforestation) | Additionality requires demonstration of counterfactual land use |
| Biochar | Century-scale permanence is difficult to verify with standard criteria |
| DAC (Direct Air Capture) | Greenwashing risk from "permanent removal" claims |
| Methane destruction | Additionality tied to local regulation |
| Cookstoves | Energy consumption baseline difficult to verify in the field |
What Changed in v2.0
- Projects are now classified into 14 sectors, enabling targeted risk assessment
- Sector-specific penalty gates reduce scores when key documentation is absent or inadequate
- Vintage assessment tracks recency of monitoring data and adjusts confidence accordingly
- Semaphore indicators and "what would improve" fields are now documented in the methodology
- Confidence is computed deterministically from document availability, gate coverage, and vintage — not by the AI model
Watch: Methodology · YouTube