*Te Apiti Wind Farm
Score Breakdown
Integrity
verified Additionality was tested using an investment test and was confirmed by the VVB in the project document.
missing Leakage treatment is not addressed, and reversal risk is not clearly managed beyond the project being a wind farm.
Transparency
verified The project document identifies the project, crediting period, and baseline approach, giving some core project context.
missing Key MRV details such as the monitoring period, verifier name, and verified emissions figures are not stated in the extracted record.
Claim Safety
verified The project is a renewable-energy wind project, which generally lowers over-crediting risk compared with more complex land-use projects.
missing The baseline is project-specific rather than a clearly standardized or recently reassessed jurisdictional baseline, and leakage is not addressed.
Documentation
verified The record includes a project design document and shows no material findings or corrective actions required.
missing Extraction confidence is low, and only limited document coverage is visible in the extracted record.
Detailed Analysis
Integrity
The project document states that additionality was assessed with an investment test and that the VVB confirmed it, which is a meaningful positive for integrity. The same document reports no material findings and no corrective actions required. On the negative side, leakage is marked as not addressed and no leakage deduction is provided, so the integrity score is held back.
Transparency
Transparency is limited because the extracted record does not state the verifier name, monitoring period, or verified emissions totals. The project design document does provide the project identity, crediting period, and a project baseline approach, but the overall MRV picture remains incomplete. Low extraction confidence further reduces confidence in the documentation trail.
Claim Safety
Claim safety is moderate because this is a wind project, which is generally lower risk than many other credit types, and the project has VVB-confirmed additionality. Still, the baseline is project-specific rather than clearly standardized, leakage is not addressed, and there is no evidence in the extracted record for usage monitoring or other safeguards that would reduce over-crediting risk. With no CORSIA or CCP status stated, channel-risk clarity is also limited.
Documentation
The available evidence appears to come mainly from a project design document, with four documents used in extraction, but the record is sparse. The extraction confidence is low, which suggests at least one key source was difficult to read. Although no material findings or corrective actions were reported, the missing monitoring and registry details keep the documentation score low.
Overall
Overall, the project looks directionally credible because additionality was VVB-confirmed and no material findings were reported. However, the evidence base is incomplete, with low extraction confidence and several missing MRV fields, so confidence in the claim is only moderate. There are no contradictions listed in the merged facts, so no document-priority conflict needed to be resolved.
Audit Analysis
This is a wind project with VVB-confirmed additionality and no reported material findings, which supports integrity. However, the record is thin, the extraction confidence is low, and several key MRV and registry details are not stated, which weakens transparency and claim safety.
Project Description
Developer: Meridian Energy Ltd Type: Wind Size: Large scale Crediting period: 2008-04-29 → 2015-04-28 Estimated annual credits: 180000 tCO2e SDGs: Goal 7: Affordable and Clean Energy, Goal 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth, Goal 13: Climate Action
Red Flags
- Leakage is not addressed, with no quantified deduction or justification found in the available record.
- The project has low extraction confidence and missing monitoring/registry details, limiting confidence in the claims.
Credit Vintages
| Issued | Retired | Available | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2004 | 56,399 | 56,399 | 0 | |
| 2005 | 183,663 | 183,663 | 0 | |
| 2006 | 174,375 | 174,365 | 10 | |
| 2007 | 191,374 | 191,027 | 347 | |
| Total | 605,811 | 605,454 | 357 |
Cosa migliorerebbe questo punteggio
- Provide the verification report and monitoring report with verified emissions totals, monitoring period, and verifier identity.
- Document leakage treatment, buffer or reversal safeguards, and registry/channel status to clarify claim safety.
Questi suggerimenti indicano quali prove pubbliche aggiuntive potrebbero migliorare il livello di confidenza di questa valutazione. Non garantiscono un punteggio futuro più alto.
Risk Indicators
VVB-confirmed investment test
No reversal evidence, but buffer status not stated
Leakage not addressed
Project baseline, reassessment timing unclear
FPIC and grievance mechanism present, but partial detail
CORSIA/CCP status not stated
Where to buy
+ Know where to buy this?
Listing multiple projects? Send us a CSV at [email protected].
⚑ Dispute this rating
Registry Documents
Sei il proprietario di questo progetto?
Correzione metadati (gratuita)
Nome, paese, marketplace o link errati? Segnalacelo.
Non modifica lo score.
[email protected] →Rivalutazione con nuovi documenti
Hai documentazione aggiornata non ancora inclusa? Puoi richiedere un nuovo run della pipeline con i nuovi input.
Invia Documenti →