Renoster

How do we know if a forest carbon project is truly additional? The answer lies in forest economics—a field that has been around for decades but is only recently becoming central to designing high-quality carbon credits. In the latest Renoster Office Hours (in our favorite type of office - outdoors! 🌲), our Forest Economist, Mary Ignatiadis, dives into a foundational tool: The Faustmann Model—first developed in the late 1800s to help foresters determine the optimal time to harvest for maximum value. Why does this matter for carbon credits? ✔️ Understanding trade-offs – Delaying harvest for a carbon project impacts future land value. ✔️ Valuing opportunity costs – Carbon payments must compete with timber and other land uses. ✔️ Accounting for time – The time value of money (discount rates!) plays a major role in decision-making. While forest economics is a well-established discipline, it’s only now being fully integrated into carbon market design. The good news? New research is emerging at an accelerating pace, improving how we measure additionality and leakage. Check out Mary’s breakdown and let us know—how do you think economic models should shape carbon credit design? 👇 #CarbonMarkets #ForestEconomics #ClimateFinance #SustainableForestry

Ever opened a carbon project document and felt overwhelmed? 😵💫 With hundreds of pages, spreadsheets, and technical details, it’s easy to get lost. That’s why we’re breaking it down! In this sneak peek video from our carbon course, Mateus Mendes walks through how to navigate key project documents like PDDs (Project Design Documents) and extract the most critical insights. 📊 🧩 Where is the project located? 🧩 Who are the key stakeholders? 🧩 What’s the estimated GHG reduction? 🧩 How many credits can be expected? Understanding these details is crucial for investors, developers, and anyone working in carbon markets. 🥁 If you’re eager for more, join us to learn how to efficiently analyze these documents and make data-driven decisions in our course starting on Feb 17: 🔗 https://lnkd.in/gPGxdyNC Reach out to hello@renoster.co for corporate packages and more info! #CarbonMarkets #GHGReduction #Sustainability #CarbonCredits #ClimateAction

Would you trust a medical trial with no control group? Probably not. Yet, for years, carbon markets have relied on static baselines—essentially guessing how much deforestation would have occurred. In today’s “Office Hours”, Elias Ayrey (PhD) explains the case for dynamic baselines and discusses their pros & cons. 🚀 Pros: ✅ Update with real-time events and adapt over time as conditions change ✅ Compare a project to a real-world control group ✅ Base credit issuance on actual, observed trends ✅ More conservative, reducing the risk of over-crediting ⚠️ Cons: 🔍 Require strong data sources and appropriate control groups 🔍 Can be manipulated if not implemented carefully At Renoster, we’ve analyzed over 100 projects using dynamic baselines. The verdict? They’re a massive step forward, but execution is everything. What’s your take? Are dynamic baselines the future of carbon markets? 📌 Our carbon course, Scaling Quality in the VCM, begins in 2 weeks! We’ll dig into dynamic baselines and other fundamental pillars of carbon crediting. View the full curriculum and learn more here: https://lnkd.in/gPGxdyNC #carbonmarkets #dynamicbaselines #carboncredits #deeptransparency #climateeducation

⏳ Shorter Contracts vs. Longer Contracts There are various perspectives on how contract length impacts additionality in IFM (Improved Forest Management) projects... 1️⃣ Shorter contracts have a greater impact – More participation from those who wouldn’t otherwise take action. 2️⃣ Longer contracts have a greater impact – Ensures sustained commitment and durability. 3️⃣ It depends on intent – Additionality is more about motivation than contract length. 4️⃣ Contract length isn’t the key factor – Other elements (e.g., financial incentives, project design) matter more. What's your take? Vote and add your comments below! #ImprovedForestManagement #ContractLengths #CarbonCredits

In our latest 'Office Hours' session, Elias Ayrey (PhD) breaks down a critical flaw in Verra’s VM0047 reforestation methodology—one that could be allowing landowners to cut down native forests, replant trees, and still receive carbon credits. While Verra claims their broader standard prevents this, the actual wording of their rules leaves room for interpretation that could be manipulated. This means: 🌲 Timber companies could clear-cut forests, replant, and profit from carbon credits. 🌲 Landowners might deforest, wait a few years, then enroll the land for credits. 🌲 Speculators could flip deforested land at a higher price because of credit eligibility. We’ve already seen real-world examples of this happening—like a Brazilian eucalyptus plantation that clear-cut rainforest and still received credits. Verra has been incredibly vague about how this is being addressed. Their wording in the methodology makes clear this rule is only applicable to a subset of projects. Wording in the VCS standard only refers to forest degradation that was related to the project. So, what do we do? We need stronger, clearer standards to prevent carbon credits from rewarding deforestation. ✏️ Let us know what you think in the comments and what other questions you have for us! 📌 Want to dig deeper into the ins and outs of various methodologies? Consider checking out our carbon course starting Feb 17: https://lnkd.in/gPGxdyNC #CarbonMarkets #Reforestation #CarbonCredits #Transparency

In our latest 'Office Hours' session, Elias Ayrey (PhD) breaks down a critical flaw in Verra’s VM0047 reforestation methodology—one that could be allowing landowners to cut down native forests, replant trees, and still receive carbon credits. While Verra claims their broader standard prevents this, the actual wording of their rules leaves room for interpretation that could be manipulated. This means: 🌲 Timber companies could clear-cut forests, replant, and profit from carbon credits. 🌲 Landowners might deforest, wait a few years, then enroll the land for credits. 🌲 Speculators could flip deforested land at a higher price because of credit eligibility. We’ve already seen real-world examples of this happening—like a Brazilian eucalyptus plantation that clear-cut rainforest and still received credits. Verra has been incredibly vague about how this is being addressed. Their wording in the methodology makes clear this rule is only applicable to a subset of projects. Wording in the VCS standard only refers to forest degradation that was related to the project. So, what do we do? We need stronger, clearer standards to prevent carbon credits from rewarding deforestation. Let us know what you think in the comments and what other questions you have for us! 📌 Want to dig deeper into the ins and outs of various methodologies? Consider checking out our carbon course starting Feb 17 → https://lnkd.in/gPGxdyNC #CarbonMarkets #Reforestation #CarbonCredits #Transparency

In today's office hours with Renoster, Elias Ayrey (PhD) tackles the following question: 💡 "Are you seeing buyers receptive to new protocol standards? I've been very concerned credit programs aren't salvageable due to the negative PR, no matter how good the changes made. Most companies, as far as I can tell, are motivated by public perception more than science. In other words, John Oliver's opinion matters more than a forest scientist." New protocols, with elements like dynamic baselines and stricter standards, are receiving significant attention and excitement which is good—but sometimes at the expense of older projects that still hold real climate value. Buyers are hyper-focused on “new and improved,” but does that mean older projects should be dismissed entirely? Some of the best forest conservation efforts—like those led by Indigenous communities—are struggling to sell credits because they fall under outdated protocols. Meanwhile, high-quality credits from newer methodologies are fetching $30–50 per ton, while older credits are nearly worthless. This price difference is a symptom of a larger issue: the market seems to value perception over science. Buyers want simple stories—“we planted trees” or “we saved a forest forever”—but the best forest management often involves active intervention, like thinning, controlled harvesting, or invasive species removal. These practices create a short-term carbon dip but result in a more resilient, carbon-rich forest over time. So, how can we push for a system that values scientific integrity over PR narratives? Drop your thoughts, and let's discuss below 👇 #carbonmarkets #forestryscience #media #sustainability

🌲 Introducing Renoster’s Weekly Office Hours! The Voluntary Carbon Market (VCM) is evolving fast, and we know it’s not always easy to keep up. That’s why we’re starting a new way to connect, share, and learn together. Every week, we’ll release a short “Office Hours” video where Elias Ayrey (PhD) and others from our team will tackle your biggest questions. → What do you wish you understood better about carbon markets? → What specific challenges are you facing right now? → What’s the most exciting or confusing topic you’ve come across recently? Drop your questions and thoughts in the comments below! Or DM us if you prefer. We’ll start answering your questions in our first edition of Renoster’s Office Hours next week. 💬 🌍 #CarbonMarkets #Sustainability #Transparency #ClimateSolutions #AskRenoster

In the world of carbon projects, there’s often a bias around certain project types being lower quality. But instead of relying on labels, we should focus on understanding what defines true quality. At Renoster, we believe in helping people evaluate carbon projects based on science and critical thinking. It’s not just about dismissing projects but learning how to assess their impact and integrity. The future of carbon markets depends on this shift. As more people recognize what quality looks like, we’ll see more projects that genuinely reduce carbon and contribute to our planet’s health. Buyers, in particular, have a big role to play by supporting initiatives that deliver real results. Let’s move beyond labels and make smarter, informed choices that drive real progress. 🌱 Interested in a deeper dive? Check out our carbon course taught by Renoster team members Mateus Mendes, Elias Ayrey (PhD), and Mary Ignatiadis alongside industry experts Senken, AlliedOffsets, Kita: https://lnkd.in/gPGxdyNC 💸 Two more days to take advantage of 20% off with code VCM2025 until January 15! #CarbonCredits #Sustainability #ClimateAction #ClimateEducation