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
ScoredCARLandfill Gas Capture/CombustionFLORIDA, USRegistry: Crediting endedGeneral Methodologyv2.1

New River Regional Landfill

Developer: New River Solid Waste Association

CAR-454 ↗

#248of 552 in Methane#760of 1689 in United States#503of 948 in Climate Action Reserve (CAR)

Crediting ended

The crediting period has ended. Credits already issued exist; no new ones will be issued unless the crediting period is renewed.

Climate Action Reserve: “Completed”

Assessment

CarbonMeld document-based assessment

01020304 Overall 5.0 / 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%.

Scored2026-09-19medium confidenceLatest verified monitoring: 2016-12-31

evidence:13/13registry documents analyzed · 4red flags

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

Analysis

The New River Regional Landfill is a CAR-registered methane capture project with VVB-confirmed additionality and a measured project-specific baseline, but the record is undermined by a significant discrepancy in verified ERR figures across two verification reports, an unresolved contradiction on whether gas capture was legally required, and the absence of any quantified leakage treatment. Four material findings (flow-meter drift, monitoring-plan non-conformance, calibration lapses, and an incorrect start date) were identified and corrected, but they collectively signal operational MRV weaknesses.

Red Flags

4 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

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)

    Methodology approved for some versionsCAR U.S. Landfill Protocol

    The Integrity Council approved some versions of this protocol and not others: check which version the project uses before claiming CCP quality.

    Source: ICVCM assessment

  • Removal or reduction

    Emission reduction or avoidance

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

    Source: project sector

  • 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:2026-09-27

Credit Vintages Exhausted

IssuedRetiredAvailable
2003
23,08923,0890
2004
39,72439,7240
2005
52,71152,7110
2006
43,62243,6220
2007
16,30516,3050
2009
33,46233,4620
2010
16,91616,9160
Total225,829225,8290

Retired by

Organisations named as beneficiaries in the registry's public retirement records.

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 →