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 pendingCDMBiomass EnergyIndiaRegistry: RegisteredAMS-I.D

Rice husk based Co generation project at Dujana unit of KRBL Limited

Developer: KRBL Limited

CDM-1551 ↗

Worked comparison example (English)

#443of 874 in Biomass#1698of 2792 in India#3602of 5732 in CDM (UNFCCC)#1264of 2002 in AMS-I.D

Score from methodology v2.1 (analysis of 23 Sep 2026). Re-assessment under v2.2 pending.

Assessment

CarbonMeld document-based assessment

01020304 Overall 4.9 / 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

Scored2026-09-23medium confidenceLatest monitoring period ends: 2017-06-30

evidence: 17/17 registry documents analyzed · 3 red flags

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

Analysis

A CDM rice-husk co-generation project with VVB-confirmed additionality but a notably heavy list of 18 material findings at validation, including misclassified barriers, missing baseline calculations, and monitoring-plan gaps. The 0% leakage deduction is justified as 'deemed negligible' in the 2017 monitoring report, yet the 2008 validation report records leakage as 'not addressed,' creating a credibility gap. Overall the project is operational and monitored, but the volume of initial deficiencies and the project-specific baseline limit confidence in the credit quality.

Red Flags

3 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 23 Sep 2026, marked “Re-assessment pending”. Per-dimension scores, risk indicators, 3 red flags, score factors, detailed analysis, and 17 registry documents (17 analyzed).

€9+ VAT · 30-day pass · one-time, no auto-renewal

Every rated project, PDF reports, API access, portfolio alerts and per-dimension scores with red-flag details in side-by-side comparisons for 30 days (public-data comparison is free; fair use: 30 projects per day).

Price + VAT · By paying you accept the Terms of Use — digital content, no refunds. How Premium works

Eligibility & market

Transactions in the CDM registry are discontinued as of 31 December 2026 (UNFCCC, checked 6 October 2026). This page keeps the project's record and our analysis.

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

IssuedRetiredAvailable
2011
16,435016,435
2012
16,835016,835
2013
18,302018,302
2014
19,619019,619
2016
20,920020,920
2017
20,799020,799
Total112,9100112,910

Methodology versions used

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

  1. 2008–2009AMS-I.D v15.0since replaced by v18.0

    monitoring report

    official page · verified on

  2. 2010–2011AMS-I.D v10.0since replaced by v18.0

    monitoring report

    official page · verified on

  3. 2011–2012AMS-I.D v10.0since replaced by v18.0

    monitoring report

    official page · verified on

  4. 2013–2014AMS-I.D v10.0since replaced by v18.0

    monitoring report

    official page · verified on

  5. 2014–2015AMS-I.D v10.0since replaced by v18.0

    monitoring report

    official page · verified on

  6. 2016–2017AMS-I.D v10.0since replaced by v18.0

    monitoring report

    official page · verified on

  • AMS-I.D: 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

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 ProvenanceAMS-I.D.
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 →