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
ScoredCCLand use (AFOLU)BrazilRegistry: SuspendedGeneral Methodologyv2.1

Rio Capitao Cardoso REDD Project

Developer: Cercarbono

ECO-141 ↗

#182of 518 in REDD+#145of 381 in Brazil#57of 165 in CerCarbono (CC)

Red flagSuspended

The registry has put the project on hold, usually pending a review or a notice to the developer. No credits are issued while the hold lasts.

No carbon credits have ever been issued for this project: credits offered against it are not backed by any registry issuance.

CerCarbono: “Suspended”

Assessment

CarbonMeld document-based assessment

01020304 Overall 5.4 / 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%.

Scored2026-09-25high confidenceLatest verified monitoring: 2022-06-30

evidence:22/22registry documents analyzed · 4red flags

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

Analysis

The Rio Capitão Cardoso REDD project has reasonable technical fundamentals — a 11.5% buffer pool, no reported reversal events, a VVB-verified combined additionality test, and a jurisdictional baseline — but the project's VCS registry status is Suspended, which is a serious concern for credit validity. Multiple contradictions across validation and monitoring reports (ERR figures revised downward, baseline method described differently) introduce data-reliability uncertainty. The project delivered approximately 118% of its pro-rata ex-ante expectation for the elapsed monitoring period, which is a positive signal, but the suspension and documentation inconsistencies temper confidence.

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)

    Not published

    This registry does not publish CORSIA eligibility per project.

  • 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 sector

  • Paris Agreement (Article 6)

    Not published

    This registry does not publish Article 6 authorizations.

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.

Credit Vintages

No issuances recorded on the registry.

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 →