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
Re-assessment pendingVCSLivestock, enteric fermentation, and manure management; Waste handling and disposalChinaRegistry: Registered

Xuan Cheng Composting Project Phase II

Developer: Xuancheng Nanyang Biotechnology Co., Ltd

VCS-2866 ↗

Worked comparison example (English)

#1445of 1735 in Industrial#2539of 3065 in China#1461of 1608 in Verra (VCS)

Score from methodology v2.1 (analysis of 31 Aug 2026). Re-assessment under v2.2 pending.

Assessment

CarbonMeld document-based assessment

01020304 Overall 4.3 / 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%.

Re-assessment pending · v2.1

Scored2026-08-31medium confidence

evidence: 23/23 registry documents analyzed · 4 red flags

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

Analysis

The Xuancheng Composting Project Phase II is a registered VCS project with a confirmed investment-test additionality and an inherently low permanence risk (avoidance-type credits from avoided methane). However, the verification process surfaced an unusually large number of material findings — 13 corrective action requests and 10 clarification requests — covering calculation inconsistencies, sampling-methodology failures, and cross-document value mismatches that collectively undermine confidence in the reported emission reductions. The 0% leakage deduction and project-specific modeled baseline, combined with contradictory ERR figures across documents, leave meaningful residual risk.

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

Unlock the full analysis

On this page: the analysis of 31 Aug 2026, marked “Re-assessment pending”. Per-dimension scores, risk indicators, 4 red flags, score factors, detailed analysis, and 23 registry documents (23 analyzed).

€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)

    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)

    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:2026-10-25

Credit Vintages

IssuedRetiredAvailable
2020
9,7569,7560
2021
47,49047,44446
2022
44,82534,05610,769
2023
43,52839,6933,835
2024
21,86015,4706,390
Total167,459146,41921,040

Methodology versions used

The methodology version stated in each monitoring, verification and issuance document, by period, compared with the official methodology pages.

  1. 2020–2022AMS-III.D v21.0since replaced by v22.0

    verification report

    official page · verified on

  2. 2020–2022AMS-III.F v12.0current version

    verification report

    official page · verified on

  3. 2022–2023AMS-III.D v21.0since replaced by v22.0

    verification report

    official page · verified on

  4. 2022–2023AMS-III.F v12.0current version

    monitoring report + verification report

    official page · verified on

  5. 2023–2024AMS-III.D v21.0since replaced by v22.0

    verification report

    official page · verified on

  6. 2023–2024AMS-III.F v12.0current version

    monitoring report + verification report

    official page · verified on

  • AMS-III.D: Active (CDM / UNFCCC) · official page · verified on
  • AMS-III.F: Active (CDM / UNFCCC) · official page · verified on

A version is shown only when the document's own text writes it next to the methodology code. Current versions, status and CCP ranges come from the official pages linked, checked on the date shown.

Documents on the registry

Retired by

Organisations named as beneficiaries in the registry's public retirement records. (+39)

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 →