Düzova Wind Power Project, Turkey

Integrity

The project has a relatively solid starting point because the verification report confirms additionality through an investment test, and the baseline method is project-based under ACM0002. Leakage is presented as negligible with a 0% deduction, but the record does not clearly show buffer pool treatment, and reversal handling is inconsistent across the extracted material. Open forward action requests in the monitoring report also suggest some unresolved implementation issues.

Transparency

The monitoring period is clearly stated, and the VVB is named as RE Carbon Ltd., which helps traceability. But the extracted record does not provide total claimed or verified emission reductions, and usage monitoring details are not stated. The low extraction confidence further reduces confidence that the documentation is complete and fully readable.

Claim Safety

Claim safety is helped by the project type and the stated negligible leakage treatment, which lowers the risk of inflated credits. However, the project is marked CORSIA-eligible, while CCP status is not mentioned, so the dual-market claim picture is incomplete. The absence of verified usage-rate information also leaves some residual over-crediting uncertainty.

Documentation

The record includes a substantial set of extracted facts, and it does mention FPIC, a grievance mechanism, and multiple verification findings. Still, the extraction confidence is low, several key fields are missing, and the monitoring report lists open FARs that were not yet closed. The crediting-period contradiction also indicates that the documentation trail is not fully clean or internally consistent.

Overall

I privileged the newer monitoring-report values where they appeared more recent and specific, such as the 2025 leakage characterization and the 2023-2025 crediting period, but the contradictions themselves materially reduce confidence. In particular, the record conflicts on leakage treatment, reversal events, and crediting period, so I scored downward for reliability even though the project has a VVB-confirmed additionality case. The low extraction confidence and open action items further justify a mid-range overall score.