IND/REC/WND/GCC/18062025/00007
OG-68525803
Score Breakdown
Integrity
missing Additionality, baseline approach, leakage treatment, and any findings/corrective actions were not found in the extracted record due to missing documents
inferred The project is described as renewable energy avoidance, but without documents the baseline and additionality cannot be assessed
Transparency
missing No VVB name, monitoring period, or verified vs claimed ER figures were found in the extracted record
missing Registry/documentation completeness cannot be checked because no evidence documents were provided
Claim Safety
missing Over-crediting risk cannot be screened because baseline method, leakage justification, and any usage/operational monitoring details were not found
inferred CORSIA/CCP status was not found in the extracted record, so double-claim/eligibility risk cannot be ruled out
Documentation
missing Zero documents were used in extraction, leaving the assessment unsupported by primary sources
missing Low extraction confidence suggests document readability/quality issues and reduces reliability
Detailed Analysis
Integrity
No official documents were captured in the extracted record, so the baseline method, additionality test, leakage approach, and any buffer/reversal provisions were not stated in available documents. Because there is no verification/monitoring evidence in the record, it is not possible to confirm whether emission reductions are additional or conservatively quantified. Given these evidence gaps, integrity is scored very low by default.
Transparency
The extracted record includes no evidence documents and does not provide a VVB name, monitoring period, or any claimed-versus-verified emission reduction figures. With no monitoring/verification reports available, MRV quality and registry completeness cannot be assessed. Transparency is therefore scored very low.
Claim Safety
Without baseline and leakage documentation, the risk of over-crediting cannot be evaluated and must be treated conservatively. Eligibility indicators relevant to double-claim risk (such as CORSIA eligibility or CCP status) were not found in the extracted record. As a result, the project is not safe to claim against based on the available evidence.
Documentation
No documents were used in the extraction (0 total), and the minimum extraction confidence is low, indicating at least one key document was poorly readable. This combination implies major documentation incompleteness and unreliable extraction. Documentation is scored near the floor.
Overall
There are no contradictions listed in the extracted record. However, the absence of any captured project documents and the low extraction confidence dominate the assessment and drive all dimension scores downward due to inability to substantiate key quality criteria. Note: under the gate rules, a documentation score below 3.0 would cap transparency post-scoring.
Audit Analysis
The extracted record contains no usable project documentation, so core quality elements (baseline, additionality, leakage, and monitoring performance) cannot be validated. With low extraction confidence and zero documents captured, the risk of over-crediting and weak substantiation is high based on evidence gaps alone.
Project Description
Verify on BlockChain IND/REC/WND/GCC/18062025/00007 Tamil Nadu, India Listed Credits - 10000 | Total Credits - 10000 | Fully | Transferable | Renewable Energy Credits OG Score - 71 $ 6 per Credits Bid
Red Flags
- No project documents were captured in the extracted record (0 documents), preventing validation of baseline, additionality, leakage, and MRV claims
- Minimum extraction confidence is low, indicating at least one key document was poorly readable and increasing the risk of missing or incorrect facts
Credit Vintages
Nessuna emissione registrata sul registro.
Cosa migliorerebbe questo punteggio
- Provide the PDD and the latest monitoring and verification reports (including VVB opinion) so baseline, additionality, leakage, and MRV can be validated
- Provide registry and eligibility evidence (issuance/retirement records, CORSIA/CCP status, and any corresponding adjustment statements if relevant) to reduce double-claim and greenwashing risk
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
No additionality assessment found
Avoidance type but permanence provisions not evidenced
No leakage treatment found
No baseline method found
No safeguards evidence found
CORSIA/CCP status not evidenced
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 →