CAPITAL FLOWS: MARKET MECHANISMS

Carbon Credits

Standards, quality assessment, pricing, and best practice.
The detailed mechanics of carbon credit procurement.

In 30 Seconds

Carbon credits connect emitters with projects that reduce or remove carbon:

  • 1 credit= 1 tonne of CO2 reduced, avoided, or removed
  • Global MarketsCombined value ~$115B (2024) - primarily compliance markets
  • IntegrityShift to CCP-labeled credits (Core Carbon Principles)

Key insight: Not all credits are equal. Quality varies enormously - from $2/tonne (questionable) to $400+/tonne (direct air capture). Understanding quality is essential for credible procurement.

Two Types of Carbon Markets

Voluntary Carbon Markets (VCM)

Companies choose to buy

  • Size (2024)$0.5-4 billion
  • RequirementEntirely voluntary
  • Key buyersMicrosoft, Salesforce, Shell

Why they buy: Reputation, stakeholder pressure, genuine climate commitment, net-zero targets

Now merging with high-integrity standards (ICVCM, the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market) to restore buyer confidence.

Compliance Carbon Markets

Governments require permits

  • Size (2024)~$113 billion
  • RequirementLegal obligation
  • ExamplesEU ETS, UK ETS, California

How it works: Government caps total emissions, companies must buy/trade allowances. Penalties for non-compliance.

20-200x larger than voluntary markets (EU ETS = 80%+ of value).

How a Carbon Credit Is Born

From project development to retirement

1

Project Development

Someone develops a project: forest protection (REDD+), clean cookstoves, tree planting, or direct air capture

2

Methodology Selection

Project follows approved methodology specifying how to measure carbon impact and baseline

3

Validation & Verification

Third-party auditors verify the project is real and the carbon maths is correct

4

Registration & Issuance

Registry (Verra, Gold Standard) issues credits with unique serial numbers

5

Trading & Retirement

Credits trade until a company "retires" them to offset emissions - permanently removing from circulation

The Key Players

Carbon markets have a surprisingly complex ecosystem

Standard-Setters & Registries

The rule-makers and record-keepers

  • Verra - Largest registry, 1.3B+ credits issued
  • Gold Standard - Premium, strong SDG focus (WWF)
  • ACR - American Carbon Registry (since 1996)
  • CAR - Climate Action Reserve (North America)

Rating Agencies

The quality assessors

  • Sylvera - Rates 300+ projects AAA-D
  • BeZero Carbon - Rates 400+ projects
  • Calyx Global - 1,000+ ratings, subscriber-funded

Project Developers

The ones building projects

  • South Pole - 700+ projects, 50+ countries
  • 3Degrees, Pachama, ClimatePartner
  • Natural Capital Partners

Governance Bodies

The integrity watchdogs

  • ICVCM - Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market; sets Core Carbon Principles (CCP)
  • VCMI - Claims Code of Practice for responsible credit use
  • PACM - Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism (UN-backed)

The Quality Problem

Not all carbon credits are created equal. This is the biggest challenge.

What Can Go Wrong

Additionality Failure

The project would have happened anyway, without carbon credit revenue.

Example: Protecting a forest that was never actually threatened.

Over-Crediting

More credits issued than actual carbon benefit.

Example: Inflated baseline assumptions, optimistic projections.

Permanence Risk

The carbon doesn't stay stored.

Example: A forest burns down, releasing all "sequestered" carbon.

Leakage

Protecting one forest pushes deforestation elsewhere.

Example: Emissions happen anyway, just somewhere else.

Topical: ICVCM and CCP

The Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market (ICVCM) was created to address credibility problems in the voluntary market. Its Core Carbon Principles (CCP) define what high-integrity credits must meet, and CCP labels let buyers spot higher-quality credits across registries.

Topical: Paris Agreement Article 6

Article 6 is the Paris Agreement framework for international carbon cooperation. It has two market mechanisms and one non-market track: 6.2 allows bilateral trading of credits between countries (ITMOs), 6.4 creates a UN-supervised crediting mechanism (often called the Article 6.4 mechanism/PACM), and 6.8 covers non-market cooperation without trading.

How the Market Is Responding

  • ICVCM Core Carbon Principles (CCP) labels are now the primary integrity benchmark
  • Rating agencies (Sylvera, BeZero, Calyx) provide independent project-level due diligence
  • Article 6 registries ensure unique tracking and prevent double-counting
  • SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard V2.0 tightens rules on Scope 3 and removals (published 2026, mandatory from 2028)

What Does a Carbon Credit Cost?

What Affects Price

  • Project typeRemoval > Avoidance
  • Quality ratingAAA commands premium
  • Co-benefitsBiodiversity, community add value
  • VintageRecent worth more
  • RegistryGold Standard premium

Rough Price Ranges (2024)

Low-quality avoidance$2-5/tonne
Standard nature-based$10-25/tonne
High-quality removal$30-100/tonne
Engineered removal (DAC)$400-1,000+/tonne

How Companies Should Use Carbon Credits

The Mitigation Hierarchy

The mitigation hierarchy supported by VCMI and SBTi Corporate Net-Zero Standard V2.0:

1
MEASURE
Know your emissions (Scope 1, 2, 3)
2
REDUCE
Cut emissions wherever possible
3
COMPENSATE
Use credits for residual emissions
4
CONTRIBUTE
Fund climate action beyond your footprint

Best Practices

Do

  • • Set science-based targets first - credits don't replace reduction
  • • Prioritize quality over quantity
  • • Diversify project types
  • • Use rating agencies for due diligence
  • • Be transparent - disclose what you're buying and why
  • • Focus on removals for net-zero claims

Don't

  • • Buy cheap credits to avoid hard decarbonisation
  • • Assume all credits are equal
  • • Claim “carbon neutral” without reduction context
  • • Put all eggs in one basket
  • • Buy purely on price
  • • Skip due diligence

Common Criticisms (And Responses)

"Carbon credits are just greenwashing"

The concern: Companies buy cheap credits instead of reducing emissions.

The nuance: Done badly, yes. Done well, credits fund real climate projects AND companies reduce emissions. The VCMI Claims Code guides responsible use: credits should supplement, not replace, decarbonization.

"REDD+ forests aren't really saving carbon"

The concern: High-profile investigations found some forest projects over-credited.

The nuance: Some projects were poor quality. But rating agencies now flag these. The market is learning. Not all forest projects are bad - due diligence matters.

"The market is unregulated"

The concern: No government oversight means anything goes.

The nuance: It's self-regulated through standards bodies. ICVCM is adding a quality layer. It's imperfect, but improving. Compliance markets show regulation is possible.

Quick Reference

Key Terms

TermMeaning
AdditionalityWould the project have happened without credit revenue?
Article 6Paris Agreement rules for international carbon trading cooperation between countries
Article 6.2Bilateral carbon trading agreements between two countries (operational 2026)
Article 6.4UN-backed international carbon market mechanism (PACM), still developing
Carbon creditCertificate representing 1 tonne CO2 reduced/removed
CBAMCarbon Border Adjustment Mechanism - EU tariff on carbon-intensive imports (active Jan 2026)
CCPCore Carbon Principles - ICVCM quality label for high-integrity carbon credits
CORSIACarbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (mandatory 2027)
ICVCMIntegrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market - sets quality rules for high-integrity credits
ETSEmissions Trading System - government-run compliance carbon market (e.g., EU ETS, UK ETS)
LeakageDoes protecting one area push emissions elsewhere?
OffsetUsing a credit to compensate for emissions elsewhere
PACMParis Agreement Crediting Mechanism - the UN centralized carbon trading system under Article 6.4
PermanenceWill the carbon stay stored long-term?
REDD+Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation
RegistrySystem to track, issue, and retire carbon credits (e.g., Verra, Gold Standard, national registries)
RetirementPermanently removing a credit from circulation after use
VCMVoluntary Carbon Market
VCUVerified Carbon Unit (Verra's credit)
VERVerified Emission Reduction (Gold Standard's credit)
VintageThe year a credit was issued

Carbon Markets in 2026: What's Changing

Article 6 Now Operational

Bilateral agreements (6.2) infrastructure live. Singapore-Indonesia-Rwanda implementation agreements signed. UN mechanism (6.4) developing for 2026-27 scaling.

CORSIA Aviation Offsetting

Mandatory from 2027. Airlines preparing procurement strategies, driving demand for aviation-eligible high-quality credits.

Market Convergence

Voluntary and compliance markets merging. Governments (Singapore, South Africa, Indonesia) now allow voluntary credits for compliance, creating government-backed demand.

CCP Supply Surge

The arrival of CCP-labeled credits is standardizing high-integrity benchmarks across voluntary and compliance markets.

Technology & AI

Registry interoperability, AI-powered due diligence, transparency platforms reducing procurement time from 12-18 months to weeks.

EU CBAM Fully Applicable

Since Jan 1, 2026, tariffs on carbon-intensive imports create pressure for global emissions measurement and reduction.

SBTi Net-Zero Standard V2.0

Published 2026, mandatory from 2028, with stricter Scope 3 and removal requirements.

Removal Acceleration

Shift toward durable removals (Biochar, DAC) as net-zero targets approach and quality scrutiny increases.

The Bottom Line

Carbon credits aren't perfect. They've had scandals, quality issues, and greenwashing concerns. But they're also channeling billions to climate projects, creating price signals for carbon, and evolving rapidly with better standards. For companies serious about climate, understanding how to navigate carbon credit procurement is becoming essential.

Disclaimer: This content is for general educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute financial, investment, legal, or tax advice and should not be relied upon as such. Pandion Studio does not provide regulated investment advice. For specific guidance on your circumstances, please consult appropriately qualified professionals.