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
ScoredCDMN2OPakistanVintage 2008, 2012, 2013Registry: RegisteredACM0019

Fatima N2O Abatement Project

Developer: Fatima Fertilizer Company Limited

CDM-5461 ↗

Worked comparison example (English)

#288of 536 in Methane#15of 22 in Pakistan#3141of 4457 in CDM (UNFCCC)#18of 21 in ACM0019

Assessment

CarbonMeld document-based assessment

01020304 Overall 4.8 / 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%.

Scored2026-09-21medium confidenceLatest verified monitoring: 2022-03-31

evidence:18/18registry documents analyzed · 4red flags

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

Analysis

The Fatima N2O Abatement Project (CDM-5461, Pakistan) is a technology-based N2O abatement project with VVB-confirmed additionality via a barrier test, but it carries significant data-reliability concerns: the ex-ante lifetime estimate was revised down by roughly 77% between the 2012 validation report and the 2016 monitoring report, the leakage justification shifted from 'quantified' in the PDD to 'deemed negligible' in the 2022 monitoring report, and the project delivered approximately 307% of the pro-rata expectation for the 2021–2022 monitoring period relative to the revised ex-ante figure. Sixteen material findings from the initial verification cycle (boundary, baseline description, ER spreadsheet, monitoring procedures) were flagged and corrective actions were listed, but the cumulative effect of the contradictions and the project-specific modeled baseline limits confidence in the credit volume.

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

Per-dimension scores, risk indicators, 4 red flags, score factors, detailed analysis, and 18 registry documents (18 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

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
2013
171,4710171,471
2015
803,4110803,411
2016
991,1040991,104
2017
426,0120426,012
2019
419,7510419,751
2020
377,0210377,021
2022
611,8840611,884
Total3,800,65403,800,654

Methodology versions used

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

  1. 2012ACM0019 v1.0since replaced by v4.0

    monitoring report

    official page · verified on

  2. 2012–2014ACM0019 v1.0since replaced by v4.0

    monitoring report

    official page · verified on

  3. 2014–2016ACM0019 v1.0since replaced by v4.0

    monitoring report

    official page · verified on

  4. 2016–2017ACM0019 v1.0since replaced by v4.0

    monitoring report

    official page · verified on

  5. 2017–2018ACM0019 v1.0since replaced by v4.0

    monitoring report

    official page · verified on

  6. 2018–2019ACM0019 v1.0since replaced by v4.0

    monitoring report

    official page · verified on

  7. 2019–2020ACM0019 v1.0since replaced by v4.0

    monitoring report

    official page · verified on

  8. 2021–2022ACM0019 v1.0since replaced by v4.0

    monitoring report

    official page · verified on

  9. Period not statedACM0019version not stated in the document

    issuance document

  • ACM0019: 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 →

Marketplaces

Climate Neutral Now

~$4.25/tCO2

Vintage 2008, 2012, 2013

12,725 tCO2 available

↗
+ Know where to buy this?

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

⚑ Dispute this rating

Profile & governance

Analysis ProvenanceACM0019
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 →