GS Wind New Zealand Documentazione completa General Methodology v2.0

*Project White Hill

GS-1695 ↗

5.8 / 10

Integrity

6.8

Transparency

5.2

Claim Safety

5.6

Documentation

5.0

Score Breakdown

Integrity

verified The verification report from DNV CERTIFICATION PTY LTD confirms additionality, and no material findings or corrective actions were reported.

missing The baseline is described only as project-based, with no reassessment date, leakage deduction, or buffer arrangement stated in the extracted record.

Transparency

verified The project has a named verifier, a defined monitoring period from 2007-01-01 to 2007-12-31, and the verification report is dated 2008-09-16.

missing Total verified emissions reductions, total claimed reductions, and key MRV details such as usage monitoring and grid factor inputs are not found in the available documents.

Claim Safety

verified Wind projects generally have lower permanence risk, and the record shows no reversal events.

missing The project-specific baseline and missing leakage treatment reduce confidence that the credited reductions are fully robust.

Documentation

verified The evidence set includes a PDD and a verification report, with four documents used and medium extraction confidence.

missing The crediting period is not stated, baseline reassessment is missing, and several core quantitative fields are absent from the extracted record.

Detailed Analysis

Integrity

The verification report by DNV CERTIFICATION PTY LTD confirms additionality, which supports the core integrity case. No material findings or corrective actions were reported, and there are no reversal events in the extracted record. That said, the baseline is only described as project-based, with no reassessment date, no leakage deduction, and no buffer pool information, so the robustness of the accounting is only moderate.

Transparency

Transparency is limited by missing MRV outputs and incomplete quantitative disclosure. The monitoring period is stated as 2007-01-01 to 2007-12-31 and the verification report is dated 2008-09-16, but total verified emissions reductions, total claimed reductions, usage monitoring method, and grid emission factor inputs are not found in the extracted record. The presence of a named verifier helps, but the public-facing completeness appears partial.

Claim Safety

Claim safety is moderate because the project is a wind project with no reversal events reported, which lowers permanence concerns. However, the baseline remains project-based rather than clearly standardized or recently reassessed, and leakage treatment is not stated. CORSIA eligibility is not stated and CCP status is only noted as not mentioned, so dual-claim risk cannot be ruled out from the extracted record.

Documentation

The documentation set is somewhat limited but not absent: the extracted record shows a PDD and a verification report, with four documents used overall. Medium extraction confidence suggests the documents were readable enough for partial extraction, but several key fields remain missing, including the crediting period and baseline reassessment timing. The absence of corrective actions is positive, yet the overall record is incomplete for a high-confidence assessment.

Overall

The project appears credible on the narrow question of additionality, because the verification report confirms it and no material findings were reported. The main weaknesses are documentation gaps around baseline reassessment, leakage, and emissions-reduction totals, which keep the score in the middle range. There are no contradictions listed in the extracted record, so no document hierarchy conflict needed to be resolved.

Audit Analysis

This is a reasonably credible wind project with VVB-confirmed additionality and no reported material findings in the verification report. However, the record is thin on baseline reassessment, leakage treatment, and crediting-period detail, which limits confidence in the claim quality and documentation completeness.

Project Description

Developer: Meridian Energy Ltd Type: Wind Size: Large scale Methodology: Other Crediting period: 2007-01-01 → 2013-12-31 Estimated annual credits: 130500 tCO2e SDGs: Goal 13: Climate Action, Goal 12: Responsible Production and Consumption

Red Flags

Leakage treatment is not stated in the available documents, even though it should be straightforward to document for a wind project.
The record does not state whether the project is CORSIA-eligible, and CCP status is only noted as not mentioned, leaving dual-claim risk unclear.

Credit Vintages

		Issued	Retired	Available
2007		31,895	31,717	178
Total		31,895	31,717	178

Cosa migliorerebbe questo punteggio

Publish the full monitoring and verification data, including verified emissions reductions, baseline inputs, and any leakage treatment.
State the crediting period, baseline reassessment history, and explicit CORSIA/CCP status to reduce double-claim and documentation uncertainty.

Questi suggerimenti indicano quali prove pubbliche aggiuntive potrebbero migliorare il livello di confidenza di questa valutazione. Non garantiscono un punteggio futuro più alto.