Clean Bitcoin Secondary Market
CC-8
Score Breakdown
Integrity
missing Baseline approach, additionality assessment, and leakage treatment were not found in the extracted record (no documents available).
inferred Project is labeled as an avoidance credit type, but permanence/leakage/baseline details are not substantiated by any cited document.
Transparency
missing No monitoring/verification details (VVB name, monitoring period, claimed vs verified reductions) were found because no documents were provided.
missing Registry/MRV completeness cannot be assessed from the extracted record.
Claim Safety
missing Eligibility/status for CCP or CORSIA and any double-claim controls were not found in the extracted record.
missing Over-crediting risk cannot be bounded because baseline and verification evidence are missing.
Documentation
missing No evidence documents were provided and zero documents were used in extraction.
missing Low extraction confidence reduces trust that key facts were captured even if sources existed.
Detailed Analysis
Integrity
No project documents were available in the extracted record, so the baseline method, any baseline reassessment timing, and the additionality test (and whether a VVB confirmed it) are not stated in available documents. Leakage treatment (deduction percentage and justification), any buffer pool or reversal provisions, and any material findings/corrective actions are also not found. This creates a high integrity uncertainty consistent with a very low score.
Transparency
Because no monitoring report or verification report is present in the extracted record, the VVB name, monitoring period, and any comparison of claimed versus verified emission reductions are not stated in available documents. MRV methods (including any usage monitoring or fossil fuel displacement approach) are not found. With low extraction confidence and no documents, transparency is effectively absent.
Claim Safety
Claim safety cannot be supported because the extracted record contains no evidence on baseline conservativeness, leakage controls, or independent verification outcomes. Status for CCP approval and CORSIA eligibility is not stated in available documents, so double-claim/eligibility risk cannot be ruled out. Given the absence of substantiating documentation, the risk of over-crediting and greenwashing is elevated.
Documentation
The extracted record lists zero evidence documents and indicates that no documents were used, which is a critical documentation gap. In addition, extraction confidence is low, implying at least one key source (if any existed) was poorly readable. With no accessible PDD/monitoring/verification materials, documentation quality is extremely weak.
Overall
There are no listed contradictions in the extracted record, but the absence of any documents (and low extraction confidence) prevents substantiation of nearly all quality-critical elements. As a result, all dimension scores are driven downward primarily by evidence gaps rather than confirmed deficiencies. Note: documentation is below 3.0, so transparency would be capped by the stated gate rule when applied downstream.
Audit Analysis
The extracted record contains no usable project documentation, so core quality attributes (baseline, additionality, leakage, and MRV) cannot be substantiated. Given the very low documentation completeness and low extraction confidence, the risk of over-crediting and misleading claims is high.
Project Description
Proven and transparent proof of right to unretired Renewable Energy Credits that reserve the amount of renewable energy to mine one Bitcoin at the date created per unit the value of the Clean Bitcoin is correlated with the increase in global Bitcoin network electric use. Serials: <To be allocated> Documents: https://carbon.credit/api/getPubFile?id=11
Red Flags
- No official documents were available in the extracted record (0 documents used), preventing validation of baseline, additionality, and monitoring.
- Low extraction confidence indicates at least one key source was poorly readable, further reducing reliability.
- No information found on VVB, monitoring period, ERR verification, leakage treatment, or safeguards.
Credit Vintages
Nessuna emissione registrata sul registro.
Il marketplace dichiara i vintage: 2023 (non verificato).
Cosa migliorerebbe questo punteggio
- Provide the CAR project documents (PDD, monitoring report(s), and verification/verification statement) showing baseline selection, additionality test, leakage assessment, and quantified verified emission reductions.
- Disclose registry and integrity details: VVB identity, monitoring period dates, any material findings/corrective actions, and explicit statements on CCP/CORSIA eligibility and double-claim controls.
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
Permanence provisions not evidenced
No leakage treatment found
No baseline method found
No safeguards evidence found
CCP/CORSIA 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
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 →