Skip to main content
CarbonMeld CarbonMeld Carbon Observatory
Tools
EN
Re-assessment pendingCARLandfill Gas Capture/CombustionUSRegistry: RegisteredCAR-US-LANDFILL

Lawton GCCS

Developer: City of Lawton

CAR-1050 ↗

#97of 694 in Methane#347of 1794 in United States#167of 1012 in Climate Action Reserve (CAR)#26of 124 in CAR-US-LANDFILL

Score from methodology v2.1 (analysis of 19 Sep 2026). Re-assessment under v2.2 pending.

Assessment

CarbonMeld document-based assessment

01020304 Overall 5.8 / 10 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%.

Re-assessment pending · v2.1

Analysis

The Lawton GCCS landfill gas capture project has a solid additionality foundation (VVB-verified combined test) and is over-delivering relative to its ex-ante estimate, but is held back by a project-specific modeled baseline, unaddressed leakage, and a pattern of recurring methane-analyzer calibration and data-gap findings across multiple reporting periods. Contradictions between the 2024 and 2025 verification reports on baseline characterization and crediting-period start date introduce data-reliability concerns.

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

Unlock the full analysis

Per-dimension scores, risk indicators, 5 red flags, score factors, detailed analysis, and 66 registry documents (66 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)

    CCP-labelled credits

    The registry marks these credits with the Core Carbon Principles label of the Integrity Council.

    Source: registry label

  • Removal or reduction

    Emission reduction or avoidance

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

    Source: registry label

  • Paris Agreement (Article 6)

    No Article 6 authorization

    No corresponding adjustment: the host country can also count this reduction towards its own target.

    Source: registry label

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:2026-10-04

Credit Vintages

IssuedRetiredAvailable
2013
11,80211,8020
2014
30,17930,1790
2015
50,29850,2980
2016
23,12423,1240
2017
45,14045,1400
2018
22,42522,4250
2019
31,43531,4350
2020
23,87823,8780
2021
41,53641,5360
2022
59,94355,0004,943
2023
40,06340,0630
2024
16,304016,304
2025
6,14806,148
Total402,275374,88027,395

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].

Profile & governance

Analysis ProvenanceReserve Landfill Project Protocol

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 →