Vai al contenuto principale
ACR avoidance India Vintage 2008, 2012, 2013 Solo marketplace General Methodology v2.0

Bundled Waste Processing Facilities in India

CNN-355220

1.4 / 10
Integrity
2.0
Transparency
0.5
Claim Safety
2.0
Documentation
0.8

Score Breakdown

Integrity

missing Additionality approach, baseline method, leakage treatment, and any corrective actions were not found in the extracted record

inferred The project is described as an avoidance project, but permanence/reversal risk management (e.g., buffer pool or reversal procedures) is not stated in available documents

Transparency

missing No VVB name, monitoring period, or verification/monitoring results were found in the extracted record

missing No public-facing MRV details (e.g., claimed vs verified reductions, monitoring methods) were available from the extracted documents

Claim Safety

missing No information was found on baseline stringency, leakage justification, or any quantified deductions, increasing over-crediting risk

inferred Eligibility/labels that affect claims (e.g., CORSIA eligibility or CCP status) were not stated in available documents

Documentation

missing No evidence documents were provided in the extracted record (0 documents used)

missing Minimum extraction confidence is low, reducing confidence in completeness and accuracy of extraction

Detailed Analysis

Integrity

No project design or assurance content was available in the extracted record: no baseline approach, additionality test, leakage assessment, or permanence/reversal provisions were found. With zero documents used and low extraction confidence, there is insufficient evidence to judge whether the credited reductions are additional or conservatively quantified. Integrity is therefore scored very low due to the evidence gap.

Transparency

The extracted record does not include a verification body, monitoring period, monitoring methodology, or any comparison of claimed versus verified emission reductions. With no documents available, registry-level completeness and MRV transparency cannot be substantiated. Transparency is scored very low because the underlying data needed for third-party scrutiny is missing.

Claim Safety

No information was found on baseline stringency, leakage deductions or justification, or any parameters that would indicate over-crediting risk controls. The extracted record also does not state whether the project is CORSIA-eligible or has any CCP-related status, leaving claim-related labeling risks unresolved. Claim safety is therefore low given the inability to validate conservative accounting and eligibility claims.

Documentation

The extracted record lists zero evidence documents and indicates low minimum extraction confidence, implying key documents were not available or not readable. This prevents assessment of recency, completeness, and whether any corrective actions were required and closed. Documentation is scored near the floor due to the absence of usable source material.

Overall

There are no listed contradictions in the extracted record, but the absence of any project documents (0 used) combined with low extraction confidence creates a major reliability and completeness problem. Because baseline, additionality, leakage, MRV results, and verification details are not stated in available documents, the project cannot be credibly scored higher on any dimension. Note: under the gate rules, a documentation score below 3.0 would cap transparency after scoring.

Audit Analysis

The extracted record contains no usable project details beyond the project name, standard, and registry code, and the minimum extraction confidence is low. With no accessible evidence on baseline, additionality, monitoring, leakage, or verification outcomes, the project cannot be assessed as high quality based on the available documents.

Project Description

The Bundled Waste Processing Facilities project is a pioneering initiative in India’s journey toward sustainable waste management. Operated by IL&FS Environmental Infrastructure Services Limited, this project process capacity of 600 tons of municipal solid waste (MSW) daily across three composting plants located in Punjab…

Red Flags

  • No project documents were available in the extracted record (0 documents used), preventing validation of baseline, additionality, MRV, and safeguards
  • Minimum extraction confidence is low, indicating at least one key document was poorly readable and increasing the risk of missing or misread critical information

Credit Vintages

Nessuna emissione registrata sul registro.

Il marketplace dichiara i vintage: 2008, 2012, 2013 (non verificato).

Cosa migliorerebbe questo punteggio

  • Provide the PDD, validation/verification reports, and monitoring reports so baseline, additionality, leakage, and MRV procedures and results can be checked
  • Disclose key assurance and registry fields (VVB name, monitoring period, claimed vs verified reductions, corrective actions, and CORSIA/CCP status) and ensure documents are readable to raise extraction confidence

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

Additionality

No additionality assessment found

Permanence

Reversal risk management not evidenced

Leakage

No leakage treatment found

Baseline

Baseline method not found

Safeguards

Safeguards not evidenced

Double-claim

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
Analysis Provenance Scored 2026-04-02 General Methodology v2.0 Solo marketplace

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