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 pendingCDMMethane avoidanceChinaRegistry: RegisteredAMS-III.R

Sichuan Rural Poor-Household Biogas Development Programme

CDM-2898 ↗

Worked comparison example (English)

#187of 509 in Biogas#1749of 3030 in China#3249of 5482 in CDM (UNFCCC)#8of 68 in AMS-III.R

The project's documents changed since this analysis (analysis of 5 Oct 2026). Re-assessment pending.

Assessment

CarbonMeld document-based assessment

01020304 Overall 5.0 / 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 · v2.2

Scored2026-10-05medium confidence

evidence:3registry documents · 0red flags

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

Analysis

Sichuan Rural Poor-Household Biogas Development Programme (China) recovers methane from livestock manure at households and small farms (household biogas digesters (6 m3, 8 m3 and 10 m3) treating manure anaerobically, with gas purified and fed into a biogas stove for cooking) under AMS-I.I version 04, AMS-III.R version 03; registry status Registered (CDM), 4,986,434 credits issued (vintages 2014–2021). The documents name TÜV NORD as validation / verification body. Credits were issued per the registry; no monitoring or verification report is among the documents read. The project also includes an energy component under AMS-I.I, not assessed here.

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 3 registry documents.

€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

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
2014
468,8390468,839
2016
613,2520613,252
2018
748,5030748,503
2019
1,646,03001,646,030
2020
822,5200822,520
2021
687,2900687,290
Total4,986,43404,986,434

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-III.R
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 →