The Capturiant Standard

Disclaimer: The intellectual property rights of all materials in this document are owned by Capturiant. The information provided in this document is subject to change.



The Capturiant Standard Summarized

Environmental and Sustainable Development Benefits (ESDBs) verified under The Capturiant Standard and minted as Environmental Asset Credits (EACs) shall meet the following principles:  

1. Quantifiable baseline that is real, measurable, and unique

2. Third-party verification that is both independent and transparent

3. All projects must be complete, have a reasonable approximation of permanence, and show additionality

(Collectively referred to herein as “The Capturiant Standard”).  

The Capturiant Standard Principles

Real: All ESDBs generated by projects must be proven to exist as described by the methodology.

-   KYC of owners and project proponents

-   Ongoing AML for financial components of projects

-   Direct connections to the people, organizations, and governments involved

Measurable: All ESDBs must be quantifiable using recognized and approved measurement tools against a legitimate baseline.  

-  Baselines need to be established

   o  For annual/cyclical projects

      ● 3 years of data is minimum requirement

   o  For longer time-cycles projects

      ● A case-by-case consideration can be requested

   o  For preservation projects

      ● Dynamic Baselines will be formulated and updated

      ● Rate of change for loss prevention is not enough

   o  For emission reduction projects

      ● Either three (3) cycles of proven emission records or proof of standard practice

-   Scientific approach to quantification is a must. If it cannot be calculated it does not qualify

-   Acceptable Error Factors below 10%

   o  Avoid compounding errors such as Estimates of Approximations

   o  Density and Volume

-   Device for ongoing monitoring is helpful, but mandatory

   o  Calibration of instrument is important

   o  Results must be shareable and auditable

Unique: Each EAC must be unique and must only be associated with a single ESDB. There must be no double counting or double claiming of the ESDB on any level.

-   Transactions between companies must be reflected in national carbon accounting

   o  Distinguish carbon tallies for national inventories vs company reporting

      ●   Identify if a company’s total emissions (e) are being included in national total e

      ●  If reduction or sequestration is sold across national borders, there must be clarity as to which national inventory claims the ESDB

-   EAC’s cannot be listed on multiple registries simultaneously

   o  Exception allowed if an OCO (one-cancels-the-other) agreement is in place

-   The same asset cannot be sold to two distinct buyers

-   Assets can only be retired one time and only by the registered Controller

Additional:  ESDBs must be additional to what would have happened under a business-as-usual scenario if the project had not been carried out.  

-   Legal

   o  Baseline adjusted by legal requirements that mandate certain practices

   o  Governmental promptings or incentives to implement the project

-   Financial

   o   Demonstrate a marginal benefit from implementing the project, display a net gain in net total carbon drawdown based on monetary incentives

-   Barriers-to-entry

   o  Demonstrate how cultural, social, or technical barriers were overcome by project implementation

-   Common practice

   o  When emission reduction or sequestration activities reach such ubiquity industry wide that their use is expected, they are no longer eligible for crediting

   o  When a practice has been implemented long enough to establish a new baseline, further crediting will be set from newly established levels

-   Lifecycle analysis (LCA)

   o  If a "business-as-usual" approach still results in net deposits of carbon or carbon equivalent, then additionality is satisfied from baseline of net zero

      ●  Measurements for baselines can include the next best alternative or be a weighted average by common usage rates of similar effects.

-   Clear Benefit

   o  Projects not meeting any of the above metrics for additionality, yet can demonstrate clear and defined climate benefits, will be considered on a case-by-case basis

Independently Audited: All ESDBs must be verified to a reasonable level of assurance by a Verification Body that is accredited or licensed and has the expertise necessary in both the country and sector in which the project is taking place. 

-   No undisclosed conflicts of interest

   o  Paid by, but not beholden to, project developer

   o  Distinct from the validation body of same project

   o  Disclosure of any potential issues that could arise

-   Qualified 3rd party verification body is to be approved by standard

   o  Submission of application, including proof of qualifications

   o  Review process to assess sector expertise

Transparent: There must be sufficient and appropriate public disclosure of ESDB-related information to allow intended users to make decisions with reasonable confidence

-   Certain details of project types, methodology, location, duration, etc. are public information

-   Confidential information is given a space to be protected in the review process

Complete: All ESDB activities must be accounted for and reported on within the chosen project boundary.  Any specific exclusions must be disclosed and justified. 

-  Leakage must be accounted for specifically

-  Projects must show appropriate risk assessment and efforts toward the “no net harm” principle

-  Considerations must be sought and made for all relevant or affected stakeholders

Permanent: Adequate safeguards are in place to minimize risk associated with reversals of ESDBs and a system exists to guarantee any assets associated with the reversed ESDBs will be replaced or compensated

-  Legally

   o  Deeds with clear ownership rights

   o  Enforceable contracts stipulating a conservation agreement

-   Economically

   o  Fees or fines for breaking the conservation agreement

   o  Claw backs and penalties for replacing credits reversed

-   Durability

   o  Generally targeted at 100 years

   o  Another way to proxy permanence

   o  PV calculation of durability considerations

      ●  Is it more important for present removal to push the timescale back, even if only for 50 years, than it is to not remove any at all?

-   Reversibility risk

   o  Higher risk leads to higher buffer pools for certain project types

   o  Risk mitigation must be specified in PDD submitted for projects

[Last Updated on 08.01.2023]