Skip to main content
CarbonMeld CarbonMeld Carbon Observatory
Tools
EN
ScoredVCSFugitive emissions from fuels (solid, oil and gas)BangladeshRegistry: RegisteredAM0023

Reducing Gas Leakages within North West and other sub-areas of the Titas Gas Distribution Network in Bangladesh

Developer: Carbon Projects LLC

VCS-3021 ↗

#1of 694 in Methane#1of 143 in Bangladesh#1of 1609 in Verra (VCS)#1of 13 in AM0023

Assessment

CarbonMeld document-based assessment

01020304 Overall 8.4 / 10 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%.

Analysis

Reducing Gas Leakages within North West and other sub-areas of the Titas Gas Distribution Network in Bangladesh (Bangladesh) detects and repairs physical gas leaks with an advanced leak detection and repair programme (6 Hi-Flow samplers or Leak Measurement Devices) under AM0023 version 4; registry status Registered (VCS), 1,709,398 credits issued (vintages 2022–2024). The documents name Carbon Check (India) Private Ltd as validation body and KBS Certification Services Limited (2023-07-01 – 2024-12-31) as verification body. The documents estimate 1,090,992 tCO2e per year. The latest verification report (01-July-2023 – 31-December-2024) verifies 2,188,894 tCO2e. Credits issued so far are 60% of the ex-ante estimate for the crediting period elapsed.

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 13 registry documents (13 read).

€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)

    In scope, not yet eligible

    The registry flags units as in scope for CORSIA; eligibility still needs host-country authorization.

    Source: registry label

  • Integrity label (ICVCM CCP)

    CCP-labelled credits

    The registry marks these credits with the Core Carbon Principles label of the Integrity Council.

    Source: registry label

  • 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:2026-10-11

Credit Vintages

IssuedRetiredAvailable
2022
310,3800310,380
2023
1,384,01815,6231,368,395
2024
15,000015,000
Total1,709,39815,6231,693,775

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].

Profile & governance

Analysis ProvenanceAM0023 version 4

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 →