A different kind of verification

Mozambique's LNG story has entered a particularly important phase for revenue assurance. TotalEnergies reported the project at roughly 40% completion, with LNG production targeted for 2029.

The research framework behind the Multi-Dimensional Revenue Intelligence Algorithm (MDRIA) does not treat financial declarations as self-validating. Its central principle is to compare taxpayer-controlled claims with evidence the taxpayer cannot easily control.

In petroleum, the paper specifically identifies recoverable costs as a major fiscal exposure, because overstating the cost bank today can reduce the state's future share of profit petroleum. Mozambique's LNG construction phase suggests a powerful extension of that idea: satellite-observed ACE verification during construction, run while the project is still visibly taking shape rather than after the deduction is already booked.

From invoices to observable progress

Suppose a project reports a sharp increase in claimed cumulative spending during a particular construction period. Financial records may show engineering invoices, site-preparation costs, storage facilities, processing structures, roads or other infrastructure. But what changed physically? Repeated satellite observations can document expansion of prepared land, new structures, construction density, storage areas and access roads — visible indicators of project progress that sit outside the taxpayer's direct control.

MDRIA already proposes remote sensing as an independent observation channel, using satellite-derived physical activity as a constraint precisely because it sits outside the taxpayer's direct control.

The important point is not that a satellite can determine whether a project legitimately spent $500 million rather than $400 million. It cannot. Instead, comparing satellite-observed completion against claimed cumulative spend creates a timing-consistency test. If cumulative ACE rises rapidly while observable construction changes only marginally, the mismatch can identify a period requiring closer examination. Conversely, substantial visible progress may support the timing plausibility of reported expenditure.

Why capture evidence now

Construction creates temporary evidence. Earthworks disappear beneath permanent facilities. Laydown areas change. Equipment arrives and leaves. Roads expand. Structures move from foundations to completion. Once the project is operating, reconstructing exactly what existed during a disputed expenditure period becomes much harder. That makes ACE pool timing integrity a documentation problem as much as an accounting problem.

Triangulation, not satellite auditing

The strongest model would not use imagery alone. Satellite progress should be triangulated with several independent sources at once. That mirrors MDRIA's broader philosophy: several imperfect but independently held constraints become powerful when they point in the same direction.