10 MW Solar Photovoltaic Power Plant in Rajkot, Gujarat (India)
Score Breakdown
Integrity
verified The verification report confirms additionality was checked by the VVB, and the monitoring report reports no material findings.
missing Leakage is only described as negligible with a 0% deduction, while reversal risk is not addressed and no buffer pool is stated.
Transparency
verified The project has a named VVB, a defined monitoring period, and a recent monitoring report dated 2025-02-04.
missing Total verified and claimed emission reductions are not stated, and key MRV items such as usage monitoring and grid emission factors are missing.
Claim Safety
verified The project uses a project baseline and the monitoring report applies a 0% leakage deduction with a negligible-leakage justification.
missing CORSIA eligibility and CCP status are not stated, and the missing verified emissions figures make over-crediting risk harder to assess.
Documentation
verified The record draws on multiple document types, including a monitoring report, PDD, and stakeholder consultation material, with high extraction confidence.
missing The crediting period is inconsistent across documents, and safeguards are inconsistently described between the PDD and monitoring report.
Detailed Analysis
Integrity
The monitoring report dated 2025-02-04 shows no material findings and the VVB, LGAI Technological Center, S.A., confirmed additionality, which supports the project’s core environmental case. The project uses a project baseline and reports a leakage deduction of 0% with leakage deemed negligible, but reversal events are not addressed and no buffer pool percentage is stated, so permanence and leakage controls are only moderately supported.
Transparency
Transparency is weakened by missing core MRV values: total verified and claimed emission reductions are not stated in the extracted record, and usage monitoring details are also absent. On the positive side, the monitoring period is clearly stated and the project has a named verifier, but the lack of quantified issuance data limits public traceability.
Claim Safety
Claim safety is moderate because the project appears to rely on a project-specific baseline and the monitoring report justifies a 0% leakage deduction as negligible. However, CORSIA eligibility and CCP status are not stated, and the absence of verified emission totals makes it harder to judge over-crediting risk with confidence.
Documentation
Documentation quality is fair but not strong: the record includes multiple source types and extraction confidence is high, which helps. Still, the crediting period is inconsistent between the monitoring report and the PDD, and safeguards are inconsistently documented, with the monitoring report marking them as absent while the PDD reportedly includes them.
Overall
I privileged the monitoring report dated 2025-02-04 over the older PDD where the two conflict, because it is more recent and appears to be the primary source for monitored outcomes. That means I accepted the later leakage justification, safeguards status, and crediting period, but I still penalized the score because the contradictions themselves indicate reliability issues. The project is not severely weak, but missing verified issuance data and unresolved permanence and eligibility details keep the overall assessment below strong-investment quality.
Audit Analysis
This is a renewable electricity project with VVB-confirmed additionality and no material findings reported, which supports moderate integrity. However, key MRV details are missing or unstated, and the record contains contradictions on leakage treatment, safeguards, and the crediting period, which reduce confidence in the documentation and claim safety.
Project Description
Developer: Sembcorp Green Infra Private Limited Type: Solar Thermal - Electricity Size: Small Scale Methodology: AMS-I.D. Grid connected renewable electricity generation Crediting period: 2012-12-31 → 2022-12-30 Estimated annual credits: 16415 tCO2e SDGs: Goal 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth, Goal 7: Affordable and Clean Energy, Goal 13: Climate Action
Red Flags
- The record does not state total verified or claimed emission reductions, limiting transparency around issued credits.
- The monitoring report says leakage is deemed negligible, but the PDD reportedly said leakage was not addressed, creating a documentation inconsistency.
- The crediting period differs between documents, and safeguards are marked as absent in one source despite being present in another.
Credit Vintages
| Issued | Retired | Available | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 14,713 | 0 | 14,713 | |
| 2021 | 14,082 | 0 | 14,082 | |
| 2022 | 14,251 | 0 | 14,251 | |
| Total | 43,046 | 0 | 43,046 |
Cosa migliorerebbe questo punteggio
- Publish the verified and claimed emission reduction totals, along with the full MRV calculation tables and grid emission factor inputs.
- Resolve the document inconsistencies by issuing a reconciled statement on safeguards, leakage treatment, and the correct crediting period, and disclose permanence provisions such as any buffer pool or reversal response plan.
Questi suggerimenti indicano quali prove pubbliche aggiuntive potrebbero migliorare il livello di confidenza di questa valutazione. Non garantiscono un punteggio futuro più alto.
Risk Indicators
VVB-confirmed additionality
No buffer pool stated
0% deduction with limited support
Project baseline, reassessment timing unclear
FPIC and grievance present, but inconsistent
Eligibility/status not stated
Where to buy
+ Know where to buy this?
Listing multiple projects? Send us a CSV at [email protected].
⚑ Dispute this rating
Sei il proprietario di questo progetto?
Correzione metadati (gratuita)
Nome, paese, marketplace o link errati? Segnalacelo.
Non modifica lo score.
[email protected] →Rivalutazione con nuovi documenti
Hai documentazione aggiornata non ancora inclusa? Puoi richiedere un nuovo run della pipeline con i nuovi input.
Invia Documenti →