What are Carbon Credit Buffers and How Do They Operate in Relation to Emission Risks?

Anyone entering the carbon credit trading market has wondered at some point: What happens to the issued credits if the forest burns down? What if there is a pest infestation? What if illegal logging occurs? What about political risk or political corruption in the country where the forest is located?

This is where carbon credit buffers come into play and their relationship with the high integrity required for a credit. All those risks we just mentioned and many others are taken into consideration when establishing a carbon credit buffer that guarantees the quality of the credit issuance.

Carbon credit buffers are a crucial mechanism to reinforce the integrity and permanence of carbon credits, especially in projects involving land use, land-use change, and forestry (LULUCF). Let’s explore how they work and who uses them, with a detailed example.

How Do Carbon Credit Buffers Work?

1. Credit Reserve: A percentage of the credits generated by a project is placed in a reserve or “buffer.”
2. Risk Management: These reserved credits act as insurance against unintentional reversals (e.g., forest fires, pests).
3. Non-Commercialization: The credits in the buffer cannot be sold or traded.
4. Use in Case of Reversals: If a reversal occurs, credits from the buffer are used to offset the losses.
5. Dynamic Adjustment: The percentage of credits that go to the buffer can be adjusted based on the project’s risk assessment.

Who Uses Buffers:

1. Verra (VCS – Verified Carbon Standard): Uses a “shared risk buffer” for AFOLU (Agriculture, Forestry, and Other Land Use) projects.
2. Gold Standard: Implements a “compliance buffer” for land-use projects.
3. American Carbon Registry (ACR): Employs a “risk buffer” for forestry and land-use projects.
4. Climate Action Reserve (CAR): Uses a “buffer insurance pool” for forestry projects.

Let’s See a Complete Example: Forest Conservation Project

Project Context:

• Location: Pine Forest in the province of Cuenca
• Project Area: 1,000 hectares
• Duration: 30 years
• Objective: Prevent deforestation and forest degradation

Step 1: Risk Assessment

The project conducts a risk assessment:

• Internal Risk: 10% (e.g., project management)
• External Risk: 15% (e.g., land tenure conflicts)
• Natural Risk: 10% (e.g., forest fires, pests, illegal logging)
• Total Risk: 35%

Step 2: Credit Generation

The project avoids the emission of 1,000 tons of CO2e in one year.

Step 3: Contribution to the Buffer

Based on the risk assessment, 35% of the credits go to the buffer:

• Credits to the buffer: 350 units of the chosen verifier’s standard
• Credits available for the project: 650 units of the chosen verifier’s standard

Step 4: Issuance and Commercialization

The project can issue and sell the 650 units in the voluntary carbon market.

Step 5: Continuous Monitoring

The project is monitored annually to verify the permanence of emission reductions.

Step 6: Reversal Scenario

In year 5, a forest fire affects 100 hectares, resulting in the emission of 500 tons of CO2e.

Step 7: Use of the Buffer

The verifier withdraws 500 units from the shared buffer to compensate for the reversal. This does not affect the credits already sold by the project.

Step 8: Risk Re-evaluation

After the incident, a new risk assessment is conducted, possibly increasing the percentage contribution to the buffer for future credits.

Step 9: Project Continuation

The project continues but with an improved fire management plan and possibly a higher contribution to the buffer in subsequent years.

This example illustrates how carbon credit buffers provide a safety mechanism that reinforces the integrity and permanence of carbon credits. They help manage the inherent risks of land-use projects and ensure that, even in the case of unintentional reversals, the net climate impact of the project is maintained. This mechanism is crucial for maintaining confidence in voluntary carbon markets and ensuring that carbon offsets represent real and lasting emission reductions.

If you liked this article, you might also find the following reading interesting:

Interoperability and interoperability registries in carbon trading