9 MW Neria Hyrdroelectric Project, Karnataka, India
Score Breakdown
Integrity
verified Additionality was tested using an investment test and was confirmed by the VVB in the validation/verification record.
missing Leakage treatment is not stated and the monitoring report says leakage is not addressed; buffer pool coverage is also not found in the extracted record.
Transparency
verified The project has a named VVB and a defined monitoring period in the monitoring report.
missing Key MRV details are missing, including the usage monitoring method, verified usage rate, and a clear leakage deduction; the monitoring report also lists several corrective actions.
Claim Safety
verified The project is not CORSIA-eligible, which reduces one channel of market-claim overlap risk.
missing The baseline is project-specific rather than a recently reassessed standardized baseline, and the emissions reduction figures conflict across documents.
Documentation
verified Multiple official documents were available, including validation, monitoring, PDD, and issuance records, and extraction confidence is high.
missing The monitoring report requires several clarifications and missing supporting records, and the crediting period differs between the monitoring report and the PDD.
Detailed Analysis
Integrity
The project’s additionality case is stronger than average because the validation record shows an investment test and VVB confirmation. However, leakage is not addressed in the monitoring report, no leakage deduction is stated, and no buffer pool information was found, which weakens permanence and net-benefit confidence for a hydropower avoidance project.
Transparency
Transparency is mixed: the project has a named VVB and a defined monitoring period in the monitoring report, but key MRV fields are missing or not quantified, including the usage monitoring method and verified usage rate. The monitoring report also lists multiple corrective actions, suggesting the documentation trail is incomplete even though the extraction confidence is high.
Claim Safety
Claim safety is moderate because the project is explicitly not CORSIA-eligible, which lowers dual-market claim risk. That said, the baseline is project-specific, leakage is not addressed, and the reported emissions reductions differ across documents, so over-crediting risk cannot be dismissed.
Documentation
Documentation breadth is decent because the extracted record includes validation, monitoring, PDD, and issuance materials, and the extraction confidence is high. Still, the monitoring report contains several corrective actions and the crediting period conflicts with the PDD, so the record is not fully clean or internally consistent.
Overall
I privileged the more recent monitoring report for operational details such as the monitoring period, grievance mechanism, safeguards language, and the higher verified emissions reduction figure, because it is later and more specific than the validation report. I also noted the contradiction in emissions reductions, crediting period dates, and grid emission factor values; these inconsistencies reduce reliability and pull the score down. The project is not CORSIA-eligible, but the combination of missing leakage treatment, project-specific baseline, and multiple corrective actions keeps the overall assessment only moderate.
Audit Analysis
This is a registered hydropower avoidance project with VVB-confirmed additionality, but the evidence base has meaningful gaps around leakage, baseline reassessment, and permanence. The monitoring report also shows several corrective actions and some document inconsistencies, which reduce confidence in the claimed reductions and safeguards.
Project Description
Bhoruka Power Corporation Limited developed the Neria Mini Hydel Power Project, a 9 MW (2x4.5 MW) hydroelectric project located in Karnataka State, India. The project diverts water from the Neria river through a diversion weir to a power canal and individual steel penstocks which power each hydro generating unit. The open tail race channel releases water back into the river.
Red Flags
- Leakage is not addressed and no leakage deduction is stated.
- The monitoring report lists multiple corrective actions, including clarification of monitoring dates, double-accounting checks, and missing stakeholder consultation records.
- There are contradictions in reported emissions reductions, crediting period dates, and grid emission factor values across documents.
Credit Vintages Exhausted
| Issued | Retired | Available | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2006 | 10,517 | 10,517 | 0 | |
| 2011 | 8,482 | 8,482 | 0 | |
| 2012 | 16,326 | 16,326 | 0 | |
| 2013 | 21,040 | 21,040 | 0 | |
| 2014 | 17,498 | 17,498 | 0 | |
| 2015 | 15,873 | 15,873 | 0 | |
| 2016 | 5,423 | 5,423 | 0 | |
| Total | 95,159 | 95,159 | 0 |
Cosa migliorerebbe questo punteggio
- Provide a quantified leakage assessment and, if applicable, a justified leakage deduction or explicit rationale for negligible leakage.
- Resolve the document inconsistencies by reconciling emissions reduction totals, crediting period dates, and grid emission factor values, and publish the missing monitoring and stakeholder records.
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 investment test
No buffer pool found
Leakage not addressed
Project baseline, reassessment not stated
Partial safeguards evidence
Not CORSIA-eligible
Where to buy
Marketplaces
+ Know where to buy this?
Listing multiple projects? Send us a CSV at [email protected].
⚑ Dispute this rating
Registry Documents
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 →