Kayaduzu Wind Power Plant, Turkey

Integrity

The project has a positive integrity signal because the verification report confirms additionality through an investment test, and the VVB is named as Re Carbon Ltd. The monitoring record also says no reversal events were reported. However, leakage is only described as negligible without a quantified deduction, and the extracted record shows a contradiction on leakage treatment, which weakens confidence in the robustness of the crediting assumptions.

Transparency

Transparency is moderate because the project has a named verifier and a clearly defined 2024 monitoring period, with a recent report date. That said, the extracted record does not provide verified or claimed ERR totals, does not state the usage monitoring method, and does not include FNRB details. The low extraction confidence further reduces confidence that the public documentation is complete.

Claim Safety

Claim safety is middling. The baseline method is stated as project-based and the baseline was last reassessed in 2021, which is better than an unstated baseline, but the record does not provide the quantified leakage deduction or any usage-rate evidence. The project is marked CORSIA-eligible, while CCP status is not stated, so the dual-claim picture is incomplete and warrants caution.

Documentation

Documentation quality is limited by low extraction confidence and by several missing core fields, including buffer pool treatment, usage monitoring, FNRB, and verified issuance totals. On the positive side, the record references many source documents and the verification report notes that multiple corrective action and clarification requests were closed before issuance. The contradiction set also suggests the underlying document trail is not fully consistent across versions.

Overall

Overall, this is a plausible renewable project with some solid verification signals, but the evidence package is incomplete and internally inconsistent in several places. I privileged the more recent and more specific entries where dates were available, such as the 2024 verification-related facts and the later crediting-period statement, because they appear to reflect the latest documented status. The contradictions on additionality test type, benefit sharing, leakage, reversal treatment, and crediting period all point to reliability issues, so the score is held to a cautious mid-range.