Skip to main content
GSEnergy Efficiency - DomesticNepalGeneral Methodologyv2.0

Community Level Green Energy Promotion in Nepal VPA-01

GS-1784 ↗ · current registry ID: GS6887

#32of 202 in Industrial#4of 14 in Nepal#103of 426 in Gold Standard (GS)

5.7/ 10
Integrity
5.5
Transparency
6.0
Claim Safety
6.0
Documentation
5.0

Audit Analysis

A Gold Standard community-level energy efficiency project in Nepal with VVB-confirmed additionality and no reported reversals, but undermined by a project-specific baseline, absence of a stated buffer pool, a 0% leakage deduction with only a 'deemed negligible' justification, and a heavy load of 22 corrective action requests and 15 clarification requests across the validation and verification cycle. The project over-delivered relative to its pro-rata expectation, which is a positive signal, but the volume of unresolved documentation issues and internal contradictions in reporting methods reduce confidence in the robustness of the claims.

Red Flags

  • 22 Corrective Action Requests and 15 Clarification Requests logged across validation and verification, indicating systemic documentation and methodology gaps
  • No buffer pool percentage stated in any available document, leaving permanence risk unquantified
  • Leakage deduction of 0% justified only as 'deemed negligible' with no quantified analysis, while a later monitoring report references a 'quantified' justification — an unresolved inconsistency
  • Two different lifetime ERR figures (61,947 and 23,118) appear in successive monitoring reports, raising questions about the stability of the ex-ante estimate
  • Usage monitoring method is described as 'annual_survey' in the verification report but 'assumed' in a later monitoring report, creating ambiguity about whether usage is actually measured

Credit Vintages

IssuedRetiredAvailable
2021
3,7733,7730
2022
19,34517,8751,470
Total23,11821,6481,470

Risk Indicators

Additionality

VVB-confirmed combined test

Permanence

No buffer pool stated; avoidance type mitigates risk

Leakage

0% deduction, 'deemed negligible' only; contradictory justif

Baseline

Project-specific baseline; reassessment timing not stated

Safeguards

FPIC and grievance mechanism present; safeguarding assessmen

Double-claim

CORSIA not stated; CCP not mentioned; dual-channel risk not

Where to buy

+ Know where to buy this?

Listing multiple projects? Send us a CSV at [email protected].

⚑ Dispute this rating
Analysis ProvenanceScored2026-08-25General Methodology v2.0

Are you the project owner?

Metadata correction (free)

Name, country, marketplace or links incorrect? Let us know.

Does not modify the score.

[email protected]

Pipeline re-run with new documents

Have updated documentation not yet included? You can request a new run of the pipeline with the new inputs.

Submit Documents