Skip to main content
CarbonMeld CarbonMeld Carbon Observatory
Tools
EN
ScoredGSavoidanceChadVintage 2022Registry: Registered

Solar Cooking for Refugee Families in Chad

Developer: FairClimateFund

GS-1609 ↗ · current registry ID: GS3445

#9of 278 in Cookstoves#132of 2172 in Gold Standard (GS)

Assessment

CarbonMeld document-based assessment

01020304 Overall 7.7 / 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%.

Analysis

Solar Cooking for Refugee Families in Chad (Chad) distributes efficient cookstoves (Gold Standard simplified methodology) (solar cooker) under The Gold Standard Simplified Methodology for Efficient Cookstoves v1.1 (April 2020); registry status Registered (GS), 102,329 credits issued (vintages 2012–2024). The documents name SustainCert as validation / verification body. The latest verification report (2024-01-01 – 2024-12-31) verifies 6,137 tCO2e.

Red Flags

No red flags detected.

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, score factors, detailed analysis, and 30 registry documents (29 read).

€9+ VAT per month · card subscription, renews automatically until you cancel

Every rated project, PDF reports, API access, portfolio alerts and per-dimension scores with red-flag details in side-by-side comparisons (public-data comparison is free; fair use: 30 projects per day). Cancel any time from your account page. Crypto: $9 for one month, no automatic renewal.

Price + VAT · By subscribing or paying you accept the Terms of Use — the card subscription renews every month until you cancel; 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)

    Methodology rejected for some versionsGS The Gold Standard Simplified Methodology

    The Integrity Council rejected some versions of this protocol; other versions are still under assessment: check which version the project uses.

    Source: ICVCM assessment

  • Removal or reduction

    Emission reduction or avoidance

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

    Source: registry label

  • 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.

Registry labels last checked:2026-10-04

Credit Vintages

IssuedRetiredAvailable
2012
9,0438,914129
2013
8,9998,820179
2014
9,0268,97650
2015
9,0248,720304
2016
6,8926,80290
2017
4,5114,5110
2018
4,7764,270506
2019
7,7007,522178
2020
7,6836,0991,584
2021
8,5388,5380
2022
10,0007,3462,654
2023
10,000010,000
2024
6,13706,137
Total102,32980,51821,811

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 →

Marketplaces

+ Know where to buy this?

Listing multiple projects? Send us a CSV at [email protected].

Profile & governance

Analysis ProvenanceGeneral Methodologyv2.2

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 →