CNaught maintains a very high quality standard for all projects in the portfolios we manage. To ensure that a project meets this standard, we perform due diligence that’s backed up by third-party ratings agencies’ independent due diligence.

Additionality:

This project’s first crediting period has high additionality, meaning it is very unlikely that this project activity could have occurred in the absence of carbon funding. The project conducted a thorough investment analysis that incorporated all relevant government incentives, conclusively showing that without carbon revenue, the project would not have been financially feasible. Landfill gas capture programs were very rare in Turkey when this project began (only 9 out of 2800 landfills captured methane!¹^,²), suggesting that the activity is not common practice. However, while there were no regulatory requirements or financial incentives for landfill gas capture when the project began in 2010, after the project began, the Turkish government passed a law and created a feed-in-tariff to encourage increased renewable energy generation, which makes landfill gas projects like this far more financially viable³. According to Calyx Global, the number of landfill gas projects in Turkey increased substantially in the years immediately following. This project did not complete a new investment barrier analysis that took this new law and financial incentive into account for their second crediting period. Because of this, there is a medium-risk of non-additionality for this project’s second crediting period, so we do not sell credits from this second crediting period.

‍

Over-Crediting:

This project has a low risk of over-crediting due to the fact that its emissions reductions are a direct measurement of the amount of methane captured and either combusted or used for energy. Calyx Global noted that the project used a default value of 0% natural oxidation in their baseline calculation, which could result in slightly increased emissions reductions calculations. Natural oxidation is the process in which methane can sometimes permeate the cover sealing the landfill and migrate upwards, where it is oxidized and converted into CO2. If projects use an oxidation factor that is too low, they risk over-calculating the amount of methane they capture. During our due diligence process, we found that this impact is likely offset by the project's use of a lower methane global warming potential value than current IPCC recommendations—effectively creating a counterbalancing under-crediting effect. Project emissions are well-accounted for, with negligible risk from fugitive methane (as destruction occurs on-site rather than through pipeline injection) and landfill gas projects inherently carry no material leakage risk. Overall, we find that this project is likely to be accurately accounting for its carbon emissions reductions.

‍

Durability:

This project activity is highly durable as its emissions reductions are considered permanent, since the methane reductions it produces cannot be reversed. There is also no risk that the project activity would lead to the creation of new landfills and thus additional methane emissions. Because of this, the project is considered highly durable.

‍

Double-Counting:

The project credits have a very low risk of being double counted. There are no regulatory obligations being met by the project activity and the project’s registry, Gold Standard, has mechanisms in place to ensure that the project is not registered in any other programs.