CarbonMeld CarbonMeld Carbon Observatory
Tools
ProjectsDevelopersComparePortfolioCCP trackerA–Z index BuyersCORSIA supplyCheck an offerAPI & MCP Method About the System Editorial Policy Score Your Project
EN
Workbench ProjectsDevelopersComparePortfolioCCP trackerA–Z index
← All projects
ScoredGSEnergy Efficiency - DomesticUgandaRegistry: RegisteredGeneral Methodologyv2.1

GS1247 VPA 74 Lango Safe Water Project

Developer: CO2balance UK ltd

GS-918 ↗ · current registry ID: GS5188

Worked comparison example (English)

#1298of 1384 in Industrial#129of 139 in Uganda#1770of 1871 in Gold Standard (GS)

Assessment

CarbonMeld document-based assessment

01020304 Overall 3.6 / 10
Integrity 🔒 Transparency 🔒 Claim Safety 🔒 Documentation 🔒
Dimension scores are locked — the faint arcs are empty tracks, not zero scores.

Scale 0–10 · method weights: integrity 35% · transparency 25% · claim safety 25% · documentation 15%.

Scored2026-09-03high confidence

evidence:35/37registry documents analyzed · 4red flags

Generated by CarbonMeld Analysis Pipeline · Methodology · Editorial Policy · About the System
Download Report (PDF)

Analysis

The Lango Safe Water Project is a Gold Standard domestic water-pumping efficiency project in Uganda with a verified additionality test and no reversal events, but it is undermined by an unusually high volume of material findings (over 30 items), 22 open corrective actions, and 11 cross-document contradictions covering leakage treatment, ERR figures, fNRB methodology, and crediting period. The absence of a stated buffer pool, a 0% leakage deduction that is contradicted by the PDD's 5% figure, and a verified usage rate (95%) exceeding the design assumption (90%) raise material concerns about the robustness of the credit claim.

Red Flags

4 red flags detected — Unlock with Premium

Findings

Risk Indicators

Additionality

🔒

Permanence

🔒

Leakage

🔒

Baseline

🔒

Safeguards

🔒

Double-claim

🔒

Risk indicator details are a Premium feature

Score Breakdown

Score factors per dimension are a Premium feature — Unlock with Premium

Detailed Analysis

The detailed per-dimension analysis is a Premium feature — Unlock with Premium

Evidence

Unlock the full analysis

Per-dimension scores, risk indicators, 4 red flags, score factors, detailed analysis, and 37 registry documents (35 analyzed).

€9+ VAT · 30-day pass · one-time, no auto-renewal

Every rated project, PDF reports, API access, portfolio alerts and per-dimension scores with red-flag details in side-by-side comparisons for 30 days (public-data comparison is free; fair use: 30 projects per day).

Price + VAT · By paying you accept the Terms of Use — digital content, no refunds. How Premium works

Eligibility & market

What can you claim with this credit?

Four checks buyers ask about, from the registry and the Integrity Council (ICVCM).

  • Airlines (CORSIA)

    No CORSIA label on the registry

    Not usable for airlines' CORSIA obligations.

    Source: registry label

  • Integrity label (ICVCM CCP)

    Methodology approved by ICVCMGS TPDDTEC

    The methodology meets the Core Carbon Principles; this project's credits do not carry the CCP label yet.

    Source: ICVCM assessment

  • Removal or reduction

    Emission reduction or avoidance

    Prevents or reduces emissions — fits contribution claims, not SBTi neutralisation.

    Source: registry label

  • Paris Agreement (Article 6)

    Not published

    This registry does not publish Article 6 authorizations.

Information only, from public sources. Claim rules (CORSIA, SBTi, EU rules on green claims) change: check them before making a public claim. Since 27 September 2026, EU consumer rules do not allow “climate neutral” product claims based on offsets.

Registry labels last checked:2026-09-27

Credit Vintages

IssuedRetiredAvailable
2016
2,1702,1700
2017
9,9949,9940
2018
10,00010,0000
2019
6,3336,3330
2020
4,9424,9420
2021
3,0182,98335
2022
3,0821,1611,921
2023
8130813
Total40,35237,5832,769

Where to buy

Got an offer for these credits? Check it against the registry →

+ Know where to buy this?

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

⚑ Dispute this rating

Profile & governance

Analysis ProvenanceGeneral Methodologyv2.1
Methodology·Editorial Policy·About the System

Are you the project owner?

Metadata correction (free)

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

Does not modify the score.

[email protected] →

Contest this rating

Something wrong in the analysis, or a registry document we have not used? Send us the link to the public source: you get a reference and an answer within 30 days.

Contest this rating →