Biogas for Better Life Uganda
Score Breakdown
Integrity
verified Additionality was confirmed by the VVB, which supports the project’s core crediting case.
missing The baseline method is not stated in the extracted record, and leakage treatment is inconsistent across documents.
Transparency
verified The project has a named VVB, a defined monitoring period, and a substantial set of source documents used in extraction.
missing The record shows conflicting ERR totals across documents, and the extraction confidence is only medium.
Claim Safety
verified The project is an avoidance activity with no reported reversal events, which lowers permanence-related claim risk.
missing The claimed and verified emission reduction figures vary materially across documents, and CORSIA/CCP status is not stated.
Documentation
verified The record includes verification, validation, monitoring, and PDD sources, plus safeguards evidence such as FPIC and a grievance mechanism.
missing Key fields such as baseline method, buffer pool share, and leakage deduction are not found in the extracted record.
Detailed Analysis
Integrity
The verification report confirms additionality was checked by the VVB, which is a meaningful positive for integrity. The project is an avoidance project and the record says no reversal events were reported, but the baseline method is not stated and the leakage treatment is only described as negligible rather than quantified. That leaves some uncertainty around baseline robustness and leakage conservatism.
Transparency
Transparency is helped by the presence of a named verifier, a clear monitoring period, and multiple document types in the evidence set. At the same time, the extracted record shows conflicting emission reduction totals across documents, which makes the public claim trail harder to follow. The extraction confidence is medium, so the documentation is usable but not fully clean.
Claim Safety
Claim safety is moderate because this is a biogas avoidance project with no reported reversals and a national-default non-renewable biomass factor of 82, which suggests a conservative fuel-use assumption. However, the record does not state the baseline method, does not quantify leakage, and does not provide CORSIA or CCP status. The large differences between claimed and verified ERR figures across documents also raise over-crediting concern.
Documentation
The evidence set is fairly broad, including verification, validation, monitoring, and PDD documents, and it also records FPIC, benefit sharing, and a grievance mechanism. Still, several important fields are missing from the extracted record, including the baseline method, buffer pool percentage, and leakage deduction. The medium extraction confidence means at least one key document was not fully readable, which limits documentation quality.
Overall
I privileged the more recent verification report for safeguard and leakage wording, because it is the latest explicit source in the extracted record, while noting that an earlier verification report described leakage as quantified. I also privileged the higher verified ERR figure from the later record where the extraction shows 24,489 verified credits, but the contradiction with earlier figures materially reduces confidence in the credit volume trail. Overall, the project looks credible but not high-confidence because of missing baseline detail, inconsistent leakage treatment, and conflicting ERR totals.
Audit Analysis
This is a reasonably documented Gold Standard biogas project with VVB-confirmed additionality, no reported reversals, and safeguards such as FPIC and a grievance mechanism. However, key baseline and leakage details are incomplete in the extracted record, and the ERR figures show material inconsistencies across documents, which weakens confidence in the claimed volume of credits.
Project Description
Africa is known for its high rates of premature deaths due to indoor air pollution caused by cooking on firewood or charcoal. Air pollution has been called the 'silent killer'. This problem is severe in rural Uganda where women spend on average more than three hours per day in the kitchen to cook and clean pots and stoves. Besides, cooking on firewood contributes to fast deforestation. Cooking on biogas is an ideal solution. Biogas is a clean and renewable cooking fuel. In Uganda biogas is also used for lighting in areas without access to electricity. A biodigester at home also produces bio-slurry which is used to fertilize crops. Domestic biogas also is solution to methane emissions from cow and pig manure left decomposing in open pits. Biogas programme The Uganda Domestic Biogas Programme started in 2009 and has been the first program in Uganda that has systematically promoted the installation of biodigesters with a guaranteed quality and a network of service providers for after sales services. Biogas Solutions Uganda Ltd (BSUL) was founded to develop a commercially viable biogas sector that supports the use of domestic biogas as a local sustainable energy source. The approach of brokering partnerships between existing organisations and institutions, as well as starting new construction companies bears fruit. Since 2009 over 9,000 biodigesters have been built across Uganda. Biodigesters are constructed by local enterprises creating jobs for local masons. Partnership agreements have been signed with rural cooperatives to provide construction loans. Income from carbon credits sales benefit directly biogas users in forms of after-sales support, bio-slurry training and other useful services. Impact Domestic biodigesters provide a way for individual households with livestock to reduce their dependence on polluting firewood and charcoal. Cooking on biogas means health benefits for the whole family, in particular for women and children. In addition, w
Red Flags
- The extracted record does not state the baseline method or when it was last reassessed, leaving a gap in baseline robustness.
- ERR totals differ materially across documents, and the record contains contradictory leakage treatment descriptions.
Credit Vintages
| Issued | Retired | Available | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 | 10,487 | 10,487 | 0 | |
| 2016 | 16,188 | 15,960 | 228 | |
| 2017 | 18,070 | 17,842 | 228 | |
| 2018 | 21,267 | 21,267 | 0 | |
| 2019 | 21,570 | 21,570 | 0 | |
| 2020 | 22,264 | 22,220 | 44 | |
| 2021 | 24,306 | 23,821 | 485 | |
| 2022 | 21,019 | 5,809 | 15,210 | |
| 2023 | 16,148 | 0 | 16,148 | |
| 2024 | 3,779 | 0 | 3,779 | |
| Total | 175,098 | 138,976 | 36,122 |
Cosa migliorerebbe questo punteggio
- Publish the baseline methodology, last reassessment date, and leakage calculation in a single consistent monitoring package.
- Reconcile the conflicting ERR figures across documents and clearly state registry eligibility status for CORSIA and any CCP label.
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
Avoidance project; no reversals reported
Leakage described as negligible, not quantified here
Baseline method not stated
FPIC and grievance mechanism documented
CORSIA/CCP status not stated
Where to buy
Marketplaces
+ Know where to buy this?
Listing multiple projects? Send us a CSV at [email protected].
⚑ Dispute this rating
Registry Documents
monitoring
- 12July19 ABC PoA- VPA transition Annex v1.6 (clean).pdf
- Monitoring Report_3rd monitoring period_19.05.2019 to 30.04.2020_V1.4.pdf
- 24nov21 BSUL VPA03 MR MPIV V1.3 .docx
- T-PerfCert V2-Project-Annual-Report-Form-VPA3.pdf
- T-PerfCert_v3.0-Project-Annual-Report_02122024_VPA003.pdf
- T-PerfCert_v3.0-Project-Annual-Report_22122025_VPA003.docx
- +3 more
Other
pdd
validation
- 21-043 VPA03 Uganda MP4 GS4236 FVR 2021-11-25 clean.pdf
- Verification Report_3rd monitoring period_19.04.2015 to 31.08.2017_v1.pdf
- Validation Report_03.03.2017_v2.pdf
- CCIPL 1359 VPA 03 FVR clean.pdf
- (1)Verification Report_1st monitoring period_19.04.2015 to 31.08.2017_v3.pdf
- GS4236-VPA03 DCR FValR_05-08-2024_rev1.0_c.pdf
- +4 more
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 →