Carbon Credit Project Credibility Analysis: 7 Steps to Ensure Project Integrity

The carbon market is complex.

The many acronyms, complicated scientific principles, and changing regulations keep companies on their toes. Worse, bad actors force us to ask questions like, "Are these carbon credits real?"

Because of this last challenge, in particular, integrity is under the spotlight in 2025. Those of us in this space need to stay educated, track laws and common practices around the world, and monitor the voluntary carbon market. If we don't, we'll expose our companies to higher risk.

Good news: the seven-step framework below will help you evaluate individual projects and identify high quality credits. That way you avoid reputational risk and support climate change.

1. Align with Market and Policy Expectations

First, learn about accepted standards in the carbon market.

For example, the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market (ICVCM) has a list of core carbon principles that all carbon projects should follow. And the EU's Carbon Removals and Carbon Farming (CRCF) regulation provides a certification framework. Then there's California's AB1305, which regulates companies that are involved with the carbon market in the state.

If your carbon projects don't follow these accepted standards, they could lead to low quality credits and a diminished reputation. In some cases, said projects might hit legal restrictions and fail to produce the desired credits. So, ignore market and policy expectations at your own risk.

Also, buyers and investors need evidence of quality to comply with regulations. Auditors won't simply "take your word for it" during the crediting period. Because of this, conduct due diligence to make sure your projects meet all eligibility criteria.

2. Evaluate Country and Regulatory Risk

You don't need us to tell you that different countries have different laws and regulations. This is especially true when it comes to the carbon market, which is why you need to evaluate geographical areas before investing—at least, if you want to ensure carbon credit revenues and integrity.

For example, both Brazil and Thailand regulate the carbon market via laws and trading systems. But the process for generating credits in each country is different, as are the penalties for noncompliance. Assuming you can only invest in a limited number of projects, this leads to questions like, "Which forest carbon project is most likely to succeed and reduce emissions?"

You could study individual regulations in various host countries before making an investment. Doing so would require a lot of time and advanced understanding. Or, you could use a tool like Sylvera, which has in-depth Country Profiles to streamline the process.

Once inside our platform, you'll find detailed carbon credit datapoints for key countries. Some of these datapoints include the number of carbon projects in the country, the number of carbon credits issued thus far, the estimated number of credits still available, and the average rating of past projects. With this information, you can easily evaluate and contrast risk profiles.

3. Analyze Carbon Accounting and MRV Integrity

In this context, the acronym "MRV" stands for measurement, reporting, and verification.

Put simply, independent assessments are needed to confirm the environmental impact of carbon projects and ensure proper credit issuance. Does this project actually reduce GHG emissions? If so, how many carbon credits is it worth? These are important questions.

High-quality MRV uses a robust quantification process to measure CO2 removal, report details to agencies and/or independent third-parties, and verify carbon credits. The procedure limits potential issues, such as over-crediting risk from poor lifecycle assessment (LAC) in, for example, biochar and direct air capture (DAC) projects—a common problem that proper MRV can address.

Sylvera invests heavily in field-based modeling. To date, we've measured over 21,000 individual trees with the latest terrestrial lidar technology. We've also collected data representing 80% of all NBS projects throughout the tropics. Because of this, we offer the most comprehensive carbon measurements and ratings in the industry, across all carbon project lifecycles. 

And we’re continuing to develop and enhance these assessments across new and emerging project types, particularly engineered carbon removal.

4. Use Independent Ratings

Think back to your high school experience. You took different classes and were tested to see how much information you retained in each. At the end of the year, you were given a letter grade to represent your success in this area. Carbon project ratings are similar.

Project developers submit data to registries and verification bodies to prove a project is in line with accepted methodologies. Independent assessors then evaluate carbon removal projects for real-world impact. Basically, said assessors determine if the project will reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from the atmosphere. Then they assign a letter grade to the project based on carbon, additionally, and permanence.

• Additionality: A carbon project's impact above what would have otherwise occurred.
• Permanence: The likelihood of a carbon project's impact lasting as long as it's supposed to.

Look for independent ratings when evaluating carbon credits. Why? Because independent ratings providers are unbiased and have access to more data and expertise. Take Sylvera, for example.

Our Ratings are trusted because they're comprehensive and objective. We're not involved with the projects we rate, which allows us to give honest ratings that buyers and investors can rely on.

Plus, we cover a range of project types, from avoidance and removal to technology and nature based solutions (NBS). In fact, we've designed frameworks to easily compare said project types based on extensive research. Put simply, our team reads all the complex documentation about every carbon project, then makes it easily understood and accessible inside our platform. 

We recently launched Estimated Ratings as well, which helps buyers determine where to spend their time in regards to choosing potential carbon projects. As such, it can give your carbon offset program an advantage.

5. Validate Baseline and Additionality Assumptions

In the carbon credit market, the term "Baseline" refers to the carbon impact that would have occurred if a certain carbon project didn't exist.

Baselines are necessary to quantify the impact different carbon projects have on climate change. Unfortunately, baselines are often inaccurate.

For example, a recent study found that most REDD+ forestry projects have inflated baselines. The reason is because project developers were incentivized to produce quantity, not quality when it came to carbon credits. The result? Many carbon credits issued for these projects don't actually avoid emissions.

Another study found a similar problem with IFM offset protocols. For instance, certain methodologies enable projects to use lumber liquidator baselines to generate more carbon credits. The creditors simply assume that, without carbon financing, a forest will be aggressively logged, which inflates the deforestation rate. But it's all based on underlying assumptions, not facts. 

Independent carbon credit assessment solutions like Sylvera help minimize this problem.

First, we base our ratings on diverse data sources, including direct insights from project developers, above-ground biomass data from 48M trees across four biomes, and data from GEDI, Landsat, and the World Bank. We also conduct in-depth research on various project types. The result? Accurate baselines, leading to more reliable project ratings.

6. Use Remedial Actions to Improve Early-Stage Projects

The term "remedial actions" refers to specific actions a carbon developer should take to fix carbon project design, monitoring, and/or implementation issues.

For instance, a developer might receive remedial actions to revise baseline calculations, improve documentation, enhance carbon project verification processes, or better align project outcomes with core carbon principles. The goal? To minimize project fail rates and increase the capital flowing into projects during critical early stages.

Remedial actions help a range of stakeholders, from developers to buyers to investors:

• Project Developers: Remedial actions help improve project quality and rating. When this happens, developers produce higher value credits and enjoy better reputations.
• Corporate Buyers: Remedial actions help companies invest in pre-issuance carbon projects with greater confidence, that are not only high quality, but align with their strategic objectives.
• Investors: Remedial actions help investors improve the quality of the projects they are investing in, before investing in them. This reduces risk for their investment portfolios and improves ROI

Sylvera's Pre-Issuance Ratings include tailored remedial actions recommendations.

Our comprehensive, early-stage project insights are built on three pillars: integrity, delivery, and value. We answer the questions, "What rating will this project most likely receive at issuance?" and "When will credits be issued for this project?" and "How much will the credits be worth?"

Then we offer project-specific guidance to increase the value and viability of carbon projects, and ensure investors back projects that follow legally binding restrictions and have a high potential for profit.

7. Monitor Changes Over Time

Remember, quality in the carbon market is not static. Delivery issues, double issuance, and reversals happen. As such, stakeholders need to monitor their projects to keep them on track.

Sylvera offers a complete Monitoring suite for this purpose. Track emerging jurisdictional developments, learn about potential project problems before they become massive roadblocks, and receive real-time updates on market changes and important trends.

Also worth mentioning, Sylvera has biomass time-series capabilities, which allow corporate buyers and investors to physically see the impact their carbon projects have. This enables greater accuracy and transparency in the post-investment monitoring phase.

Invest in High Quality Carbon Credits

Credibility analyses are important—and will continue to be as the carbon market matures. Skip this step and you'll invest in risky, low quality credits that don't further climate change.

Sylvera plays an essential role in the credibility analysis process. Our platform brings confidence through trusted data, scientific methods, and transparent tools. Using it to evaluate carbon credits often leads to better decisions and more peace of mind.

Ready to learn more about the Sylvera platform? Request a free demo today.