CarbonMeld CarbonMeld Carbon Observatory
Workbench ProjectsDevelopersComparePortfolioCCP trackerA–Z index

Re-assessment pending

GS1239 Sichuan Rural Poor-Household Biogas Development Programme PoA- CPA Nb. SCHHBG-2012-002

Standard
GS
Methodology
AMS-I.C (CDM)
Registry
GS-243 ↗ · current registry ID: GS1693 · Registered
Country
China
Credit type
Biogas - Heat
Developer
Chengdu Oasis Science & Technology Co Ltd
Worked comparison example (English)

Score from methodology v2.1 (analysis of 12 Sep 2026). Re-assessment under v2.2 pending.

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%.

Re-assessment pending · v2.1

Analysed on 12 Sep 2026medium confidenceLatest monitoring period ends:

evidence: 25/28 registry documents analyzed · 5 red flags

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

How this analysis was made

Standard
Gold Standard (GS) How our current method reads projects of this standard
Methodology
AMS-I.I. - Biogas/biomass thermal applications for households/small users; AMS-III.R. - Methane recovery in agricultural activities at household/small farm level How our current method reads projects of this type
Our method
CarbonMeld methodology v2.1 · analysed on 12 Sep 2026 · 25/28 registry documents analyzed · re-assessment under v2.2 pending

Analysis

This Gold Standard biogas PoA in rural Sichuan has a VVB-confirmed combined additionality test and a measured project-specific baseline reassessed in 2023, but the verification process surfaced an unusually large volume of material findings and corrective actions (over 50 items), including calculation errors, duplicate uncertainty factors, and missing QA/QC data. The project is under-delivering relative to ex-ante estimates (approximately 21.5% lower per the verification report), which is conservative for claim safety but signals operational challenges. Multiple data contradictions across documents and a delay in re-validation further erode confidence in the MRV chain.

Red Flags

5 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

Gates applied

The gates applied to this score 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 12 Sep 2026, marked “Re-assessment pending”. Per-dimension scores, risk indicators, 5 red flags, score factors, detailed analysis, and 28 registry documents (25 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.

Enter your email to pay with crypto

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 · read on 2 Nov 2026

    Covers: this project's credit records as read on the registry

  • Integrity label (ICVCM CCP)

    Methodology under ICVCM assessmentAMS-I.C

    The Integrity Council has not decided on this methodology yet.

    Source: ICVCM assessment · ICVCM table read on 4 Oct 2026

    Covers: the methodology (every project using it), not this project's credits

  • Removal or reduction

    Emission reduction or avoidance

    Prevents or reduces emissions — fits contribution claims, not SBTi neutralisation.

    Source: registry label · read on 2 Nov 2026

    Covers: the project type, not a label on individual credits

  • 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
7,31307,313
2014
10,407010,407
2015
8,92508,925
2016
9,62409,624
2017
9,78409,784
2018
9,72009,720
2019
7,83907,839
2020
8,5288,5280
2021
8,6688,495173
2022
8,4208,252168
2023
2,3752,32847
Total91,60327,60364,000

Methodology versions used

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

  1. 2014AMS-I.C v19.0since replaced by v22.0

    monitoring report

    official page · verified on

  2. 2014AMS-III.R v2.0since replaced by v5.0

    monitoring report

    official page · verified on

  3. 2014AMS-I.C v19.0since replaced by v22.0

    verification report

    official page · verified on

  4. 2014AMS-III.R v2.0since replaced by v5.0

    verification report

    official page · verified on

  5. 2015AMS-I.I v4.0since replaced by v7.0

    monitoring report + verification report

    official page · verified on

  6. 2015AMS-III.R v2.0since replaced by v5.0

    monitoring report + verification report

    official page · verified on

  7. 2019AMS-I.I v4.0since replaced by v7.0

    monitoring report + verification report

    official page · verified on

  8. 2019AMS-III.R v2.0since replaced by v5.0

    monitoring report + verification report

    official page · verified on

  9. 2020AMS-I.I v4.0since replaced by v7.0

    monitoring report

    official page · verified on

  10. 2020AMS-III.R v3.0since replaced by v5.0

    monitoring report

    official page · verified on

  11. 2021AMS-I.I v4.0since replaced by v7.0

    monitoring report + verification report

    official page · verified on

  12. 2021AMS-III.R v3.0since replaced by v5.0

    monitoring report + verification report

    official page · verified on

  13. 2022AMS-I.I v4.0since replaced by v7.0

    monitoring report + verification report

    official page · verified on

  14. 2022AMS-III.R v3.0since replaced by v5.0

    monitoring report

    official page · verified on

  15. 2023AMS-I.I v4.0since replaced by v7.0

    monitoring report + verification report

    official page · verified on

  16. 2023AMS-III.R v3.0since replaced by v5.0

    monitoring report + verification report

    official page · verified on

  • AMS-I.C: Active (CDM / UNFCCC) · official page · verified on
  • AMS-I.I: Active (CDM / UNFCCC) · official page · verified on
  • AMS-III.R: 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.

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].

⚑ Contest this rating

Profile & governance

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 →

Similar projects

Same methodology or sector, the same registry first.