Vai al contenuto principale
GS avoidance Vintage 2022, 2023 Registry: Certified & crediting Documentazione completa General Methodology v2.0

Burkina Faso Safe Water

GS-3035 ↗

6.2 / 10
Integrity
6.7
Transparency
6.1
Claim Safety
5.8
Documentation
6.0

Score Breakdown

Integrity

verified Additionality was confirmed by the VVB, and the baseline was reassessed in 2024 using a project baseline approach.

missing The verification report recorded multiple material findings, and leakage treatment is inconsistent across documents.

Transparency

verified The project has a named VVB, a defined monitoring period from 2023-01-01 to 2024-12-31, and verified emissions reductions of 11,590.

missing Total claimed reductions are not stated, and the leakage documentation is inconsistent between the verification and monitoring reports.

Claim Safety

verified The project uses a conservative national default for non-renewable biomass and reports a usage rate of 73.89% from annual surveys.

missing Leakage justification is contradictory, and CCP/CORSIA claim status is not stated, leaving some double-claim risk unresolved.

Documentation

verified Multiple official documents were used, including validation, verification, and monitoring reports, with high extraction confidence.

missing The verification report contains many findings, and some key fields such as total claimed reductions and buffer pool share are not found in the extracted record.

Detailed Analysis

Integrity

The verification report confirms additionality through VVB review, and the baseline was reassessed in 2024 under a project-specific method. Permanence risk is limited because this is an avoidance project and no reversal events were reported, but the absence of a buffer pool value still leaves a documentation gap. Leakage is a weakness because the verification report says it was not addressed, even though a later monitoring report is said to quantify it.

Transparency

Transparency is helped by the presence of a named verifier, a clear monitoring period, and a verified emissions figure of 11,590. The project also reports an annual survey for usage monitoring and a national default approach for non-renewable biomass. However, the total claimed reductions are not stated, and the leakage treatment is inconsistent across documents, which reduces auditability.

Claim Safety

Claim safety is moderate because the project uses a project baseline and reports a usage rate of 73.89%, which suggests the monitoring is not purely assumption-based. The national default FNRB value of 0.9 is conservative, but the contradictory leakage treatment weakens confidence in the net claim. CCP status and CORSIA eligibility are not stated, so dual-market claim risk cannot be fully ruled out.

Documentation

Documentation quality is fair: multiple official documents were used, including validation, verification, and monitoring reports, and extraction confidence is high. At the same time, the verification report lists many findings, including several corrective action and clarification items, which indicates the file was not clean. Some important fields are missing from the extracted record, such as total claimed reductions and buffer pool percentage.

Overall

I privileged the verification report for the leakage statement because it is the formal assurance document, but I also noted the later monitoring report’s contradictory claim that leakage was quantified. I privileged the more recent monitoring report for the crediting-period reference where relevant, but the presence of conflicting dates across documents lowers reliability. Overall, the project looks reasonably credible, but the contradictions and multiple findings justify a cautious mid-range score rather than a high one.

Audit Analysis

This is a Gold Standard safe water avoidance project with VVB-confirmed additionality, a recent baseline reassessment, and no reported reversal events. However, leakage treatment is inconsistent across documents, several material findings were raised in verification, and some registry/claim-status fields are not stated, which keeps confidence moderate rather than high.

Project Description

Burkina Faso is one of the poorest and least developed nations, with over 40% of its population living below the poverty line. Access to clean water remains a critical challenge, with approximately half of the country's population (11.5 million people) living without a reliable source of safe water close to home. Providing safe water through carbon finance is therefore vital to communities within the project area. By leveraging carbon funding mechanisms, sustainable water infrastructure can be developed and maintained, delivering measurable social, environmental, and economic impacts. These interventions not only improve public health and quality of life but also contribute to long-term climate resilience and sustainable development. CO2balance, in partnership with Transform Burkina, has rehabilitated 182 boreholes across the Nord Region of northern Burkina Faso, bringing safe, clean water to 41,854 people - removing the need to boil water to purify it, reducing carbon emission and local deforestation as well as saving time. The project has continued to expand, will an additional 22 rehabilitations since the last issuance, bringing the project total to 204 boreholes. The burden of collecting water falls disproportionately on women and children. By rehabilitating local boreholes, the project significantly reduces the time communities spend collecting water. Project Impacts and Benefits Time saved - households save an average of 1.63 hours per day in time spent collecting water. Additional time is spent on other domestic and caring responsibilities (69%), income generation (26%), social and leisure activities (32%), religious activities (19%), voluntary activities (17%), and education and training (1%). Reduces the risk of waterborne illnesses - the project implements WASH (Water, Sanitation and Hygiene) campaigns to improve hygiene and sanitation practices, alongside Community Maintenance Training that empowers local communities to carry ou

Red Flags

  • The verification report lists multiple material findings, including several corrective action and clarification items.
  • Leakage is described as not addressed in the verification report, while a later monitoring report is said to quantify it, creating a reliability issue.

Credit Vintages

Issued Retired Available
2022
2,949 1,100 1,849
2023
4,941 0 4,941
2024
2,694 0 2,694
Total 10,584 1,100 9,484

Cosa migliorerebbe questo punteggio

  • Publish a single reconciled leakage calculation and explain why the verification and monitoring reports differ.
  • Disclose the total claimed reductions, buffer pool treatment, and explicit CCP/CORSIA status in the registry record.

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

VVB-confirmed additionality

Permanence

Avoidance project; no reversals reported

Leakage

Leakage treatment inconsistent

Baseline

Project baseline, reassessed in 2024

Safeguards

FPIC and grievance mechanism present

Double-claim

Registry status known; CCP/CORSIA 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 2026-04-14 General Methodology v2.0 Documentazione completa

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