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
Re-assessment pendingVCSEnergy industries (renewable/non-renewable sources); Waste handling and disposalNetherlandsRegistry: Issuance requested

Methane Recovery Project Aben, Wanroij, North Brabant, The Netherlands

Developer: Aben Recycling BV

VCS-335 ↗

Worked comparison example (English)

#7of 10 in Netherlands#1220of 1583 in Verra (VCS)

Score from methodology v2.1 (analysis of 3 Sep 2026). Re-assessment under v2.2 pending.

Assessment

CarbonMeld document-based assessment

01020304 Overall 4.9 / 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%.

Re-assessment pending · v2.1

Scored2026-09-03medium confidenceLatest monitoring period ends: 2022-12-31

evidence: 26/26 registry documents analyzed · 3 red flags

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

Analysis

This Dutch methane recovery project has a solid additionality foundation (barrier test confirmed by the VVB) and a recently reassessed baseline, but suffers from significant monitoring data-quality issues that led the VVB to verify only 35% of the claimed emission reductions. Multiple material findings—including the absence of a flow meter, an uncalibrated gas analyzer, and data that does not match plant records—undermine confidence in the project's MRV system. The project is not CORSIA-eligible, which limits dual-channel risk, but the absence of a stated buffer pool and a 0% leakage deduction with a thin justification leave permanence and leakage safeguards underdeveloped.

Red Flags

3 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

On this page: the analysis of 3 Sep 2026, marked “Re-assessment pending”. Per-dimension scores, risk indicators, 3 red flags, score factors, detailed analysis, and 26 registry documents (26 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)

    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: project credit type

  • 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:2026-10-18

Credit Vintages

IssuedRetiredAvailable
2006
22,79422,7940
2010
21,62612,0719,555
2011
30,081030,081
2012
44,21834,8309,388
2013
55,42255,255167
2014
53,30853,3080
2015
55,11955,1190
2016
33,28230,6992,583
2017
14,3967,4396,957
2018
15,8573,75812,099
2019
16,0838,0028,081
2020
17,4013,79413,607
2021
18,1294,29213,837
2022
17,8732,75315,120
Total415,589294,114121,475

Methodology versions used

The methodology version stated in each monitoring, verification and issuance document, by period, compared with the official methodology pages.

  1. 2008–2016AMS-I.C v9.0since replaced by v22.0

    monitoring report + verification report

    official page · verified on

  2. 2008–2016AMS-III.D v11.0since replaced by v22.0

    monitoring report + verification report

    official page · verified on

  3. 2016–2021AMS-I.C v21.0since replaced by v22.0

    monitoring report + verification report + issuance document

    official page · verified on

  4. 2016–2021AMS-III.AO v1.0current version

    monitoring report + verification report + issuance document

    official page · verified on

  5. 2016–2021AMS-III.D v21.0since replaced by v22.0

    monitoring report + verification report + issuance document

    official page · verified on

  6. 2022AMS-I.C v21.0since replaced by v22.0

    monitoring report + verification report

    official page · verified on

  7. 2022AMS-III.AO v1.0current version

    monitoring report + verification report

    official page · verified on

  8. 2022AMS-III.D v21.0since replaced by v22.0

    monitoring report + verification report

    official page · verified on

  • AMS-I.C: Active (CDM / UNFCCC) · official page · verified on
  • AMS-III.AO: Active (CDM / UNFCCC) · official page · verified on
  • AMS-III.D: Active (CDM / UNFCCC) · official page · verified on

A version is shown only when the document's own text writes it next to the methodology code. Current versions, status and CCP ranges come from the official pages linked, checked on the date shown.

Documents on the registry

Retired by

Organisations named as beneficiaries in the registry's public retirement records. (+17)

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 →