CHN/WMC/WHD/VER/26052025/00004
OG-68343ca1
Score Breakdown
Integrity
missing No information found in the extracted record on additionality testing, baseline method, leakage treatment, or any verification findings
inferred No contradictions were detected, but this is not meaningful given the absence of source documents
Transparency
missing No VVB name, monitoring period, or claimed vs verified emission reductions were found in the extracted record
missing Registry/MRV completeness cannot be checked because no evidence documents were provided
Claim Safety
missing Over-crediting and greenwashing risk cannot be evaluated because baseline approach, leakage justification, and any default factors are not available
inferred CORSIA/CCP status was not found in the extracted record, so double-claim/eligibility risk cannot be screened
Documentation
missing No evidence documents were included in the extracted record (0 documents used)
missing Minimum extraction confidence is low, reducing confidence in completeness and accuracy
Detailed Analysis
Integrity
No official documents were available in the extracted record, so there is no evidence on how additionality was demonstrated, what baseline method was used, whether leakage was assessed, or whether any material findings/corrective actions occurred. With the minimum extraction confidence marked low, the risk that key integrity-relevant details are missing is elevated. This warrants a very low integrity score pending document availability.
Transparency
The extracted record does not include a verification body name, monitoring period, or any comparison of claimed versus verified emission reductions, so MRV transparency cannot be assessed. No registry-relevant fields (such as eligibility flags) were found either. Given the absence of evidence documents and low extraction confidence, transparency is scored very low.
Claim Safety
Because baseline approach, leakage justification, and any parameters that drive crediting are not present in the extracted record, the risk of over-crediting cannot be screened. Eligibility indicators (such as CORSIA or CCP status) were not found, so potential downstream claim risks also cannot be evaluated. This results in a low claim-safety score driven by evidence gaps.
Documentation
The extracted record shows zero documents used and an empty evidence document list, meaning documentation is effectively unavailable for assessment. The minimum extraction confidence is low, indicating poor readability for at least one key source and further undermining reliability. Documentation is therefore scored near the floor.
Overall
No contradictions were reported, but this provides little assurance because the extracted record contains no underlying documents or substantive fields to compare. Given the pervasive evidence gaps and low extraction confidence, the project is assessed as high risk until primary documents (PDD, validation/verification reports, monitoring reports) are provided. Note: if documentation remains below 3.0, transparency would be capped by the stated gate rule; and if integrity remains below 4.0, the overall score would be capped at 6.0.
Audit Analysis
The extracted record contains no usable project details from official documents, and the minimum extraction confidence is low. With no evidence on baseline setting, additionality, leakage, or monitoring/verification outcomes, the project cannot be credibly assessed and should be treated as high risk until documentation is provided.
Project Description
Verify on BlockChain CHN/WMC/WHD/VER/26052025/00004 Hubei, China Listed Credits - 5000 | Total Credits - 5000 | Partially | Transferable | Waste Management Credits OG Score - 84 $ 5.8 per Credits Bid
Red Flags
- No official project documents were available in the extracted record (0 documents used), preventing validation of baseline, additionality, leakage, and MRV claims
- Minimum extraction confidence is low, indicating at least one key source was poorly readable and increasing the risk of missing or incorrect data
Credit Vintages
Nessuna emissione registrata sul registro.
Cosa migliorerebbe questo punteggio
- Provide the core VCS document set (PDD, validation report, latest monitoring report, latest verification report, and issuance/registry extracts) so baseline, additionality, leakage, and MRV can be checked
- Improve document readability/scan quality and re-run extraction to raise confidence and enable cross-checking of claimed versus verified emission reductions and any findings/corrective actions
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 assessment found
Reversal/buffer information not found
No leakage treatment found
Baseline method not found
Safeguards evidence not found
CORSIA/CCP status not found
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 →