(ABGSPL): Methane recovery in waste water treatment & Methane/Biomass Energy Generation Project
Score Breakdown
Integrity
verified The validation report from LGAI Technological Center (Applus+ Certification) confirms additionality, and no material findings were reported.
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 and a defined monitoring period from 2018-03-04 to 2020-12-31.
missing Total verified emissions reductions, usage monitoring method, and FNRB inputs are not found in the extracted record, limiting public MRV clarity.
Claim Safety
verified The project uses a project baseline under AMS-I.C., which is at least methodologically identifiable.
missing CORSIA eligibility and CCP status are not stated, and the leakage treatment has a contradiction that weakens confidence in over-crediting risk assessment.
Documentation
verified The record includes a validation report, a monitoring period, and a crediting period, with medium extraction confidence.
missing Only four documents were used and one evidence document is unknown, so the documentation set appears incomplete.
Detailed Analysis
Integrity
The validation report from 2020-02-18 by LGAI Technological Center (Applus+ Certification) confirms additionality, which is a meaningful positive signal. No material findings or corrective actions were reported, but permanence and leakage evidence are thin: buffer pool coverage is not stated, reversal events are not addressed, and leakage is only described as negligible with a 0% deduction.
Transparency
The project has a clearly identified VVB and a monitoring period covering 2018-03-04 to 2020-12-31, which supports basic traceability. However, the extracted record does not include verified emission totals, usage monitoring method, or FNRB inputs, so the MRV picture is incomplete and hard to independently assess.
Claim Safety
Claim safety is moderate at best because the project uses a project baseline under AMS-I.C., but the record does not show the key inputs needed to test over-crediting risk. CORSIA eligibility and CCP status are not stated, and the leakage treatment is weakened by the contradiction indicating another document may have quantified leakage differently.
Documentation
Documentation quality is middling: the record includes a validation report, a monitoring period, and a crediting period, and extraction confidence is medium rather than low. Still, only four documents were used, one evidence document is unknown, and several important fields are not found in the extracted record, which limits confidence in the completeness of the file.
Overall
The project looks procedurally credible but not especially robust on evidence quality. The contradiction on leakage must be treated conservatively: I privileged the validation report’s more specific and higher-priority statement that leakage was deemed negligible, but the presence of a conflicting reference lowers reliability and the score. Because no buffer pool, reversal detail, or verified emissions totals are available, the overall assessment remains only moderate.
Audit Analysis
This CDM methane recovery project has some positive integrity signals, including VVB-confirmed additionality and no material findings in the validation report. However, key evidence gaps remain around leakage treatment, permanence safeguards, and monitoring detail, which limits confidence in the claimed climate benefit.
Project Description
Status: Registered Type: PA Methodology: AMS-I.C. Project type: Methane avoidance Sub-type: Waste water Region: Asia & Pacific Sub-region: Southern Asia Reductions 1st period: 26.578 ktCO2e/yr Reductions 2nd period: 29.334 ktCO2e/yr
Red Flags
- Leakage is described as negligible in the validation report, but the contradiction log suggests another document may have quantified it differently, creating a reliability concern.
- No buffer pool, reversal history, or detailed monitoring method was found in the extracted record, and CORSIA/CCP status is not stated.
Credit Vintages
| Issued | Retired | Available | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 | 21,994 | 0 | 21,994 | |
| 2014 | 36,882 | 0 | 36,882 | |
| 2016 | 22,190 | 0 | 22,190 | |
| 2017 | 19,750 | 0 | 19,750 | |
| 2021 | 38,718 | 0 | 38,718 | |
| 2022 | 54,658 | 0 | 54,658 | |
| Total | 194,192 | 0 | 194,192 |
Cosa migliorerebbe questo punteggio
- Provide the full monitoring report with verified emission totals, usage monitoring method, and any leakage calculations or justification.
- Disclose permanence and market-risk safeguards, including buffer treatment, reversal monitoring, and explicit CORSIA/CCP status.
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 or reversal detail stated
Negligible leakage claimed, but contradiction noted
Project baseline stated, reassessment timing missing
Safeguards mentioned, but FPIC and grievance details missing
CORSIA and CCP 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 →