Doo Doo Does More

Integrity

The extracted record indicates additionality was confirmed by the VVB using a barrier analysis, which supports additionality robustness for a household biogas activity. The baseline approach is project-specific (“project” baseline method), and the timing of any baseline reassessment is not stated in available documents, which weakens baseline robustness over a long crediting period (2012-05-09 — 2022-05-08). Leakage is described as “quantified,” but the actual leakage deduction percentage is not found in the extracted record, creating uncertainty about whether leakage was conservatively applied.

Transparency

The monitoring period is clearly defined (2021-05-09 — 2022-05-08) and the VVB is named (Carbon Check (India) Private Limited), which supports traceability. The monitoring approach for usage is described as an annual survey, but neither the assumed nor verified usage rate is found in the extracted record, limiting the ability to assess whether non-usage was properly accounted for. The record provides both claimed and verified ER totals, but inconsistencies across documents reduce transparency on what was ultimately asserted versus monitored.

Claim Safety

The monitoring documentation provides verified emission reductions of 40,668 tCO2e for the stated monitoring period, which is a positive signal for claim defensibility. However, the claimed ER value is inconsistent across documents (validation report vs monitoring report), which increases the risk of overstated claims if communications rely on the higher figure. CORSIA eligibility and CCP status are not stated in available documents, so buyers cannot easily assess cross-program claim risks from the extracted record alone.

Documentation

The evidence set includes a PDD, monitoring report, and validation report, and the minimum extraction confidence is high, indicating the underlying documents were readable and extractable. The monitoring report is dated 2022-08-22, which is reasonably close to the 2021–2022 monitoring period. Nonetheless, several important social and risk-management elements (FPIC, benefit sharing, buffer pool/reversal provisions) are not found in the extracted record, reducing completeness.

Overall

Overall quality is moderate: additionality is VVB-confirmed and there are no material findings or corrective actions reported, but several key quantifications are missing from the extracted record (notably leakage deduction and usage rates). The main contradiction is in claimed ERs: the validation report (2022-08-24) lists 48,551 tCO2e claimed, while the monitoring report (2021-09-14) lists 41,823 tCO2e claimed. For scoring, the monitoring report figure is privileged because it is the project’s MRV-period reporting instrument and is more directly tied to monitored activity data; the discrepancy still lowers transparency and claim-safety due to reliability concerns. Note: if documentation were to score below 3.0, transparency would be capped post-scoring, and if integrity were below 4.0, overall would be capped at 6.0 (gate rules applied downstream).