BATMAN LANDFILL GAS (LFG) CAPTURE AND UTILIZATION PROJECT
#7of 64 in Methane#21of 121 in Turkey#122of 629 in Verra (VCS)#1of 9 in AMS-III.G
Audit Analysis
A standard landfill gas capture project under the well-established AMS-III.G methodology with VVB-confirmed additionality and no reversal events. The project delivered approximately 95% of its pro-rata ex-ante expectation for the first monitoring period, indicating no over-crediting. Main gaps include a project-specific (non-jurisdictional) baseline, an unstated buffer pool percentage, and minor reporting inconsistencies that were resolved through corrective actions.
Red Flags
- Buffer pool percentage not stated in any available document — permanence risk for a 7-year crediting period is unquantified
- Baseline is project-specific and modeled rather than jurisdictional, increasing sensitivity to local assumptions
- Usage monitoring method and usage rate (assumed vs verified) are not stated in the extracted record, leaving the energy-offset calculation partially opaque
- CORSIA eligibility and CCP status are not stated, leaving dual-channel risk unassessed
Credit Vintages
| Issued | Retired | Available | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 5,964 | 5,964 | 0 | |
| 2021 | 12,000 | 9,036 | 2,964 | |
| 2022 | 12,000 | 5,000 | 7,000 | |
| Total | 29,964 | 20,000 | 9,964 |
Risk Indicators
VVB-confirmed combined test; capture not legally required
No reversals, but buffer pool % not stated
0% deduction, deemed negligible — appropriate for sealed LFG
Project-specific, modeled; reassessment not yet due (10-yr r
FPIC conducted, grievance mechanism present, safeguards docu
CORSIA and CCP status not stated — dual-channel risk unasses
⚑ Dispute this rating
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 →