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 - DomesticSouth AfricaRegistry: RegisteredGeneral Methodologyv2.1

Highveld Air Quality - EMM central project

Developer: QK TS Pvt. Ltd

GS-1295 ↗ · current registry ID: GS989

#1515of 1570 in Industrial#66of 76 in South Africa#2019of 2078 in Gold Standard (GS)

Assessment

CarbonMeld document-based assessment

01020304 Overall 3.3 / 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%.

Scored2026-09-05medium confidenceLatest verified monitoring: 2017-04-30

evidence:21/23registry documents analyzed · 5red flags

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

Analysis

This Gold Standard energy-efficiency project (domestic coal ignition technique, South Africa) has a confirmed investment-test additionality and a named VVB (NOVA Institute), but is severely undermined by an extraordinary volume of material findings (over 50) and corrective actions (over 50) spanning calculation errors, negative coal-usage values, inconsistent tables, and a 9.15% baseline survey response rate. The verified emission reductions for the 2016–2017 monitoring period (1,067 tCO₂) represent only about 14% of the pro-rata expectation derived from the lifetime ex-ante estimate, raising serious over-crediting concerns. Documentation quality is poor, with numerous internal inconsistencies and missing data across the PDD, monitoring reports, and verification reports.

Red Flags

5 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

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)

    No ICVCM information

    No CCP label and no ICVCM decision found for this project's methodology.

  • 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 Exhausted

IssuedRetiredAvailable
2010
9779770
2011
2,2672,2670
2012
9,9999,9990
2013
4,9934,9930
2014
3,4103,4100
2015
2,2912,2910
2016
9519510
2017
2252250
Total25,11325,1130

Retired by

Organisations named as beneficiaries in the registry's public retirement records.

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 →