Skip to main content
CDMHydroVietnamACM0002

Dak Mi 4 Hydropower Project, Vietnam

CDM-4970 ↗

#1416of 1935 in Renewable energy#69of 80 in Vietnam#1149of 1459 in CDM (UNFCCC)#1088of 1287 in ACM0002

4.5/ 10
Integrity
4.8
Transparency
4.5
Claim Safety
4.2
Documentation
4.5

Audit Analysis

The Dak Mi 4 Hydropower Project is a small CDM-registered hydro scheme with VVB-confirmed additionality, but its integrity is undermined by seven corrective action requests, contradictory baseline and leakage characterisations across documents, and a 0% leakage deduction whose justification is inconsistent between the validation and monitoring reports. Transparency is limited by the absence of verified ERR figures, FNRB data, and CORSIA/CCP status in the extracted record. Overall, the project presents moderate-to-elevated risk of over-crediting and documentation weakness.

Red Flags

  • Seven corrective action requests (CARs) were raised during verification, including missing surface-water permits, an outdated methodology version (11 vs 19), PDD non-compliance with EB 66 Annex 47, an outdated grid emission factor, a monitoring-formula mismatch, an incorrect crediting-period start date, and a stale MOC.
  • Leakage justification is contradictory: the 2022 monitoring report states leakage was 'quantified' while the 2019 validation report states it was 'deemed negligible,' yet the applied deduction is 0% in both cases.
  • Baseline method is contradictory: the monitoring report describes a project-specific baseline while the validation report references a jurisdictional baseline, creating uncertainty about which baseline underpins the claimed 1,121,202 tCO₂e.
  • No buffer pool percentage is stated in any available document, leaving permanence risk unquantified despite the absence of reported reversal events.

Credit Vintages

IssuedRetiredAvailable
2014
454,7310454,731
2017
1,215,72801,215,728
Total1,670,45901,670,459

Risk Indicators

Additionality

VVB-confirmed combined test

Permanence

low inherent reversal risk for hydro

Leakage

0% deduction with contradictory justification across documen

Baseline

Project-specific baseline; method contradicts validation rep

Safeguards

Safeguards and benefit-sharing mentioned; FPIC and grievance

Double-claim

CORSIA and CCP status not stated in available documents

Where to buy

+ Know where to buy this?

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

⚑ Dispute this rating
Analysis ProvenanceScored2026-08-27ACM0002

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