There's a common misconception that the amount of carbon stored in a specific area automatically translates to the number of carbon credits a project proponent can claim. This is far from accurate.
The Concept of Additionality
Let’s break it down with a simple example: Imagine a tree absorbs X tons of carbon per year. Many assume that means X tons of carbon credits can be issued. But this ignores the concept of additionality, which is a core principle in carbon accounting. How do we know how much of the carbon absorption occurred due to natural tree growth with no human intervention?
Credits should only be issued for actions that go beyond what would have happened under a "business as usual" scenario. A project shouldn't be credited for all of X, but rather a subset— let’s call it Y — which reflects the carbon directly attributable to the project's interventions (meaning Y would not have naturally happened on its own if the project proponent did not step in with their interventions).
This distinction is critical. While above-ground biomass measurements do play a role in credit issuance, they are only part of the equation. Other factors also come into play, meaning an area with higher carbon storage doesn’t necessarily qualify for more credits, and vice versa.
Understanding this helps to ensure carbon credits are awarded more accurately and the integrity of your project remains intact.
Nika.ecois a Singapore-based full service Carbon Technical Partner. Reach out if you require carbon due diligence services or looking for a Technical Partner on your projects.