Carbon Sequestration in the Coniferous and Broadleaf Forests of the Ejido Mil Diez and Annexes, Municipality of Pueblo Nuevo, State of Durango, Mexico
CM-4f6d7d
Score Breakdown
Integrity
missing Additionality, baseline approach, leakage treatment, buffer/pooling, and any reversals were not found in the extracted record.
inferred The project is described as a forest carbon removal/REDD-type activity, but permanence and leakage controls cannot be evaluated without documents.
Transparency
missing No VVB name, monitoring period, or quantified verification outcomes were found in the extracted record.
missing Registry-relevant fields (e.g., CORSIA/CCP status, ERR claimed vs verified) were not found in the extracted record.
Claim Safety
missing No evidence was found on baseline conservativeness, leakage deductions, or verification outcomes, elevating over-crediting/greenwashing risk.
inferred CORSIA/CCP eligibility and any double-claim controls were not found in the extracted record.
Documentation
missing Zero documents were captured/used in extraction, leaving major evidence gaps.
missing Low extraction confidence suggests document quality/readability issues that undermine reliability.
Detailed Analysis
Integrity
No official project documents were available in the extracted record, so additionality testing, baseline method selection, leakage treatment, and permanence risk management (e.g., buffer pool contribution and any reversal events) are not stated in available documents. Because this is a forest carbon project, these missing elements are material to credit integrity and must be evidenced in verification/monitoring reports and the project design documentation. Given the absence of any extracted findings or corrective actions, integrity cannot be substantiated and is scored very low.
Transparency
The extracted record does not include a VVB name, monitoring period, or any quantified results such as emissions reductions/removals claimed versus verified, so MRV transparency cannot be assessed. No registry completeness indicators (e.g., eligibility flags) are present in the extracted record. With no documents and low extraction confidence, transparency is scored very low and would be subject to the post-processing cap if documentation remains below the gate threshold.
Claim Safety
No evidence was found in the extracted record to support conservative baselines, leakage deductions/justifications, or verified issuance outcomes, which increases the risk that public claims could overstate climate impact. CORSIA and CCP status are not stated in available documents, so potential dual-eligibility/double-claim exposure cannot be screened. As a result, claim safety is weak due to lack of substantiation rather than identified non-compliance.
Documentation
The extracted record shows zero evidence documents and zero documents used, which is a critical documentation failure for scoring. In addition, the minimum extraction confidence is low, indicating at least one key document was poorly readable and that important details may not have been captured. This combination warrants a very low documentation score and low confidence in any downstream assessment.
Overall
There are no listed contradictions in the extracted record, but this is because there are effectively no extracted facts to compare across documents. With zero documents and low extraction confidence, the assessment is dominated by evidence gaps across all dimensions, leading to a low overall score. Note: per the gate rules, documentation below 3.0 would cap transparency after scoring.
Audit Analysis
The extracted record contains no usable project-specific facts beyond the project name, standard, and basic classification, so core quality elements (baseline, additionality, leakage, permanence, and MRV performance) cannot be substantiated. With low readability flagged and zero documents captured, the risk of over-crediting and weak claims is high due to lack of evidence rather than evidence of poor practice.
Project Description
The project is designed to remove CO2 from the atmosphere through the increase of forest carbon pools. Located in the high peaks of the Sierra Madre Occidental in Durango, Mexico, this Improved Forest Management (IFM) project focuses on the conservation and sustainable growth of temperate conifer and broadleaf forests. The project area, spanning nearly 5,000 hectares, is home to diverse species including Pinus cooperi and Quercus sideroxyla. By implementing advanced silvicultural practices such as selective thinning (aclareos), pruning, and natural regeneration enrichment, the project actively increases the forest’s capacity to sequester carbon beyond standard industrial practices. CRISP Offset Rating Custom Gem CRISP Offset Rating said Project Summary: CAR 1729 - Ejido Mil Diez y Anexos Located in the high peaks of the Sierra Madre Occidental in Durango, Mexico, this Improved Forest Management (IFM) project focuses on the conservation and sustainable growth of temperate conifer and broadleaf forests. The project area, spanning nearly 5,000 hectares, is home to diverse species including Pinus cooperi and Quercus sideroxyla. By implementing advanced silvicultural practices such as selective thinning (aclareos), pruning, and natural regeneration enrichment, the project actively increases the forest’s capacity to sequester carbon beyond standard industrial practices. Environmental Benefits: Beyond carbon capture, the project protects a critical biological corridor for species like the Green Macaw and the Eared Quetzal. It includes active forest fire prevention, pest control, and the construction of "filtering dams" to prevent soil erosion and maintain local water quality. Social and Community Benefits: As an ejidal project, it is owned and governed by the local community. Carbon finance supports 12 families directly involved in reforestation and fencing, while the broader community benefits from reinvestment in local infrastructure and the preservation of non-timb
Red Flags
- No project documents were available in the extracted record (0 documents), preventing validation of baseline, additionality, leakage, permanence, and safeguards.
- Low extraction confidence indicates at least one key document was poorly readable, increasing the risk that critical constraints or findings were missed.
Credit Vintages
Nessuna emissione registrata sul registro.
Il marketplace dichiara i vintage: 2022 (non verificato).
Cosa migliorerebbe questo punteggio
- Provide the CAR project design document, verification report(s), and monitoring report(s) covering the latest monitoring period so baseline, additionality, leakage, permanence/buffer, and safeguards can be evidenced.
- Provide registry and issuance details (including VVB identity, monitoring period dates, claimed vs verified removals, and any corrective actions/material findings) to enable a defensible transparency and claim-safety assessment.
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
No additionality evidence found
Permanence controls not evidenced
Leakage treatment not found
Baseline method not found
Safeguards not evidenced
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
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 →