Larimar Wind Farm Project

Integrity

The project applies ACM0002 (version 17.0) with a project-specific baseline approach, and the extracted record indicates additionality was confirmed by the VVB using an investment test (monitoring report, 2024-08-29). Integrity is weakened by corrective action requests stating the grid combined margin emission factor in the registered PDD is incoherent with another PDD section and the calculation spreadsheet, which can directly affect credited emission reductions (monitoring report, 2024-08-29). Leakage is recorded as a 0% deduction, but the justification is inconsistent across documents, adding uncertainty to completeness of accounting.

Transparency

The monitoring period is clearly stated (2022-01-01 to 2023-12-31), the VVB is identified as Verifit, and the extracted record shows claimed and verified ERR match at 441,100 for the period (monitoring report, 2024-08-29). Transparency is reduced by repeated contradictions between validation/monitoring documents on key disclosures (ERR totals, leakage treatment narrative, and whether safeguards/FPIC/grievance/benefit sharing are documented), which makes it harder for third parties to reconcile the public record.

Claim Safety

The project is marked as not CORSIA-eligible, which reduces the risk of high-stakes aviation claims and some double-claim concerns (registry extract). Claim safety is nonetheless constrained by over-crediting risk signals: ERR totals differ materially between validation reports (581,384 vs 441,100) and grid emission factor values vary across documents, with a corrective action explicitly flagging incoherence in EFgrid reporting (validation reports 2017/2020/2024; monitoring report, 2024-08-29). CCP status is not found in the extracted record, leaving an evidence gap for CCP-aligned claims.

Documentation

The extracted record references a broad evidence set (PDD, monitoring report, validation report, issuance) with 18 documents used and high extraction confidence, supporting a solid documentation score. However, the monitoring report lists multiple corrective action requests and clarifications, and several fields contradict between documents (including safeguards/FPIC/grievance/benefit sharing), indicating document control and consistency issues that should be resolved for a stronger audit trail.

Overall

Overall quality is moderate: additionality is VVB-confirmed and the MRV snapshot provides core parameters, but reliability is undermined by contradictions and corrective actions tied to the grid emission factor. For contradictions, the more recent monitoring record (2024-08-29) is privileged for social/safeguards-related disclosures (it reports safeguards, FPIC, grievance mechanism, and benefit sharing as present), while the most recent validation report (2024-11-26) is privileged for the grid emission factor value (0.7173) because it is the latest validation statement; both are still discounted due to the corrective action noting EFgrid incoherence. For ERR totals, the extracted record’s 441,100 (aligned between claimed and verified in the monitoring record) is privileged over the older 2020 validation figure (581,384) because monitoring/verification-period accounting should supersede earlier validation-era estimates, but the discrepancy materially lowers confidence and thus scores.