Explocom 1, Lupeni
Score Breakdown
Integrity
verified The verification report (2025-01-28) indicates additionality was assessed using an investment test and reports no material findings or corrective actions.
missing Baseline is project-specific and the last baseline reassessment date was not found in the extracted record; reversal/buffer arrangements are also not evidenced.
Transparency
verified A named VVB (bio.inspecta AG) and a defined monitoring period (2023-07-01 to 2024-09-30) are provided in the verification record.
missing Key MRV outputs (total verified removals and any claimed removals) were not found in the extracted record, limiting traceability.
Claim Safety
verified The project is stated as not CORSIA-eligible, reducing aviation-claims channel risk.
missing Missing quantified leakage deduction and missing verified removal totals increase over-crediting and marketing-claims risk.
Documentation
verified Seven documents were used and the latest verification report is recent (2025-01-28).
missing Medium extraction confidence plus multiple cross-document contradictions reduce reliability of the extracted record.
Detailed Analysis
Integrity
The verification report (2025-01-28) supports additionality via an investment test and indicates no material findings and no corrective actions. However, the baseline is described as project-specific and the timing of any baseline reassessment is not stated in the extracted record, which weakens baseline robustness. Permanence controls are unclear because buffer pool contribution and any reversal-event reporting were not found in the extracted record, which is important for biochar durability claims.
Transparency
Transparency is moderate because the VVB is identified (bio.inspecta AG) and the monitoring period is clearly stated (2023-07-01 to 2024-09-30) in the verification record. At the same time, the extracted record does not include total removals claimed or total removals verified, which are core registry/MRV datapoints for users to validate issuance and performance. The registry is listed as "other" without further completeness signals in the extracted record.
Claim Safety
Claim safety benefits from the project being explicitly not CORSIA-eligible, lowering the risk of aviation-related double-claiming pathways. Over-crediting risk remains because leakage is said to be quantified, but the actual leakage deduction percentage is not present in the extracted record, and neither claimed nor verified total removals are available to reconcile outcomes. CCP status is not stated in the extracted record, leaving uncertainty about how the credits may be marketed against high-integrity labels.
Documentation
Documentation quality is mid-range: the extracted record references a recent verification report dated 2025-01-28 and indicates that seven documents were used. However, the minimum extraction confidence is only medium, and several key quantitative fields (verified removals, leakage deduction, permanence/buffer details) are missing from the extracted record. The presence of contradictions across documents further reduces confidence in the documentation set as captured here.
Overall
Overall quality is constrained by missing quantitative MRV outputs and by inconsistencies across documents. For safeguards, the later-dated record (2023-12-27) indicating safeguards were mentioned was privileged over the earlier (2023-10-02) record indicating they were not, but the contradiction still lowers confidence. For additionality verification, the verification report context and later-dated record (2023-12-27) indicating VVB verification was privileged over the earlier (2023-10-02) record indicating it was not, yet the inconsistency is a material reliability concern. For the crediting period, the more specific, bounded dates (2022-01-01 to 2023-06-30) were privileged over the unusually long alternative (2021-01-01 to 2025-12-31) because they align better with discrete issuance windows, but the conflict suggests registry/period mapping risk and warrants score reductions.
Audit Analysis
This Puro biochar removal project has some positive integrity signals (VVB involvement, quantified leakage approach, and no reported material findings), but key quantitative MRV elements are missing from the extracted record. Contradictions across documents on safeguards, additionality verification, and the crediting period reduce confidence and increase over-crediting/claims risk.
Project Description
Explocom is a family-owned business that has been producing BBQ charcoal since 1992. The company is now transitioning from BBQ charcoal to biochar for soil amendment and construction materials. In addition, Explocom produces liquid pyrolytic bio-condensate or wood vinegar. The company recently received the EBC certificate for sustainable biochar production. Explocom uses the retort method of pyrolysis. The heat from the syngas combustion is used in the pyrolysis process and for drying incoming feedstock. Excess syngas can be captured and stored for renewable electricity production onsite. During pyrolysis, the biochar reaches a 600°C temperature and after the process is finished it is left for 24 hours to cool down and afterwards it is pulverized. Explocom sells biochar both in powder and in granular form under the brand name Gekka Biochar. They have plans to install additional machinery that will increase the biochar production capacity threefold. The biochar has a carbon content of 78%. A lifecycle assessment (LCA) of Explocom’s production process was carried out by Accend in 2022. The LCA accounts for all process emissions from harvesting of the wood, transport to the production site, and the manufacturing of the biochar on-site and confirms that 2.47 tonnes of CO2 are removed by every 1 ton of biochar. 3rd party verification against the Puro Standard was completed in Q2 2022.
Red Flags
- Contradictory statements across documents on whether additionality was verified by the VVB.
- Leakage is described as quantified, but the actual leakage deduction percentage is not provided in the extracted record.
- Crediting period dates conflict across documents, creating uncertainty about what period credits relate to.
Credit Vintages Exhausted
| Issued | Retired | Available | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 99 | 99 | 0 | |
| 2023 | 343 | 343 | 0 | |
| 2024 | 210 | 210 | 0 | |
| 2025 | 155 | 155 | 0 | |
| Total | 807 | 807 | 0 |
Cosa migliorerebbe questo punteggio
- Publish or extract the verified net removals for the monitoring period and provide a clear reconciliation to issuance (claimed vs verified totals).
- Disclose permanence controls (biochar durability class, monitoring/usage tracking, any buffer or risk discounting) and provide the quantified leakage deduction percentage with calculation references.
- Resolve document inconsistencies by issuing a single authoritative statement on safeguards coverage, VVB additionality conclusion, and the correct crediting period dates.
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
Investment test noted, but cross-document inconsistency
Biochar permanence controls not evidenced (buffer/reversal info missing)
Leakage treated as quantified, but deduction value not provided
Project-specific baseline; reassessment timing not evidenced
Safeguards mentioned but FPIC/grievance not in place and records conflict
Not CORSIA-eligible; no CCP status 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 →