Clean Solar Electricity for Mauritius
XEP-f87099
Score Breakdown
Integrity
missing Additionality, baseline approach, leakage treatment, and any non-conformities were not found in the extracted record due to missing documents.
inferred No contradictions were detected, but this provides little assurance given the absence of underlying sources.
Transparency
missing No VVB identity, monitoring period, or quantified monitoring/verification results were found in the extracted record.
missing Registry- and MRV-relevant fields (e.g., eligibility and error checks) are not evidenced because no documents were captured.
Claim Safety
missing CORSIA/CCP status and double-claim controls were not found in the extracted record, so downstream claim risk cannot be screened.
inferred Over-crediting risk cannot be evaluated because baseline and monitoring assumptions are not evidenced.
Documentation
missing Zero documents were used in extraction, indicating a major evidence gap.
missing Low extraction confidence reduces reliability and completeness of any potential document-derived facts.
Detailed Analysis
Integrity
No official documents were captured in the extracted record, so the project’s additionality demonstration, baseline method, leakage treatment, and any permanence/reversal considerations are not stated in available documents. Without a monitoring report or verification report, there is no evidence on whether any material findings or corrective actions occurred. Given these evidence gaps, integrity is scored very low as the core determinants of credit quality cannot be substantiated.
Transparency
The extracted record contains no monitoring/verification documentation, so key transparency items such as the VVB name, monitoring period, and any cross-checks between claimed and verified emission reductions are not found. Public-data completeness cannot be assessed because no evidence documents are listed. Transparency is therefore very weak due to absence of MRV and registry-completeness evidence.
Claim Safety
No information was found on CORSIA eligibility, CCP status, baseline parameters, or leakage justification, so the risk of over-crediting and problematic marketing claims cannot be screened. With no extracted verification outcomes, there is also no evidence that claimed results were independently confirmed. Claim safety is scored low because the record does not support defensible claims.
Documentation
The extracted record shows 0 documents used and low extraction confidence, indicating severe documentation incompleteness and potential unreadability of key sources. With no listed evidence documents, independence of validation/verification and recency of monitoring cannot be checked. Documentation is therefore scored near the floor.
Overall
No contradictions were reported, but this is not meaningful assurance because the extracted record contains no underlying documents to compare. Given the absence of evidence across all core quality dimensions and low extraction confidence, the overall score is driven down by inability to substantiate additionality, baseline validity, leakage treatment, and MRV. Note: under the gate rules, documentation below 3.0 would cap transparency post-scoring, and integrity below 4.0 would cap overall post-scoring.
Audit Analysis
The extracted record contains no usable project documentation, so core quality elements (additionality, baseline, leakage, and monitoring) cannot be substantiated. With low extraction confidence 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
ENERGY
Red Flags
- No project documents were available in the extracted record (0 documents), preventing verification of baseline, additionality, leakage, and monitoring.
- Low extraction confidence indicates at least one key source was poorly readable, increasing the risk of missing or mis-extracted critical information.
Credit Vintages
Nessuna emissione registrata sul registro.
Il marketplace dichiara i vintage: 2025 (non verificato).
Cosa migliorerebbe questo punteggio
- Provide the PDD, validation report, monitoring report(s), and verification report(s) so additionality, baseline selection, leakage, and MRV results can be assessed.
- Publish or supply registry and eligibility information (e.g., VVB identity, monitoring periods, claimed vs verified ERs, and any CORSIA/CCP status) to reduce claim and double-claim risk.
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 not evidenced
No leakage treatment 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 →