Skip to main content
UCRKarnataka IndiaACM0006

18 MW Biomass Based Power Generation at GM Sugars & Energy Ltd by Energy Advisory Services

UCR-299 ↗

#149of 196 in Biomass#6of 17 in Karnataka India#196of 421 in Universal Carbon Registry (UCR)#31of 53 in ACM0006

3.3/ 10
Integrity
4.5
Transparency
1.5
Claim Safety
4.0
Documentation
2.5

Audit Analysis

This 18 MW biomass power project in Karnataka, India is registered under the UCR standard using CDM methodology ACM0006, with a 25-year crediting period and a lifetime claim of approximately 2.84 million tonnes of CO2. The available record consists solely of a PDD; no verification report, monitoring report, or VVB identification was found, leaving additionality, permanence, and actual delivery entirely unverified. The jurisdictional baseline and absence of adverse findings are positive, but the thin leakage justification and complete absence of post-registration evidence significantly limit confidence in the project's integrity and claim safety.

Red Flags

  • No verification body (VVB) is identified in the available record, and no additionality test type or VVB confirmation is stated, leaving the additionality claim unverified.
  • Only a single document (the PDD) is available; no verification report, monitoring report, or VVB audit report was found, making it impossible to confirm that the project is operating as designed.
  • Leakage is set at 0% with only a 'deemed negligible' justification, which is thin for a biomass power project where displaced fuel or alternative biomass use could generate leakage.
  • The PDD is dated January 2023 but the crediting period begins April 2013, a 10-year gap that is unexplained in the available record and may indicate a migration or re-registration without full documentation.

Credit Vintages

Issuance data not yet available — check back soon.

Risk Indicators

Additionality

Test type not stated; VVB confirmation absent

Permanence

Avoidance project; no buffer pool or reversal data

Leakage

0% deduction; 'deemed negligible' justification is thin

Baseline

Jurisdictional method stated; reassessment date and EF year

Safeguards

Safeguards and benefit sharing mentioned; FPIC and grievance

Double-claim

CORSIA and CCP status not stated; dual-channel risk unassess

Where to buy

+ Know where to buy this?

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

⚑ Dispute this rating
Analysis ProvenanceScored2026-08-19ACM0006

Are you the project owner?

Metadata correction (free)

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

Does not modify the score.

[email protected]

Pipeline re-run with new documents

Have updated documentation not yet included? You can request a new run of the pipeline with the new inputs.

Submit Documents