Reforestation · Carbon Finance Tool
Example Carbon Credit
Calculator
Estimate issuable carbon credits from a reforestation project under leading methodologies, with all standard deductions applied.
Verra VM0047 v1.1
Isometric Reforestation v1.1
Gold Standard AR v2.1
Click a standard to toggle it on or off
Project Parameters
Enter your project details
Site & Scale
iTotal land area enrolled in the project, defined by a legally secured project boundary. All three methodologies require the boundary to be mapped (e.g. KML/shapefile) and submitted at validation. Gold Standard additionally requires the boundary to appear in the Project Design Document (PDD) reviewed at validation. VM0047 §4 ↗ · Isometric §4 ↗ · GS AR Methodology §5 ↗
hectares
iThe number of years over which the project generates and sells carbon credits. Shorter periods reduce long-term obligation but limit total revenue. Verra allows renewable periods (up to three 20-year cycles). Isometric does not specify a minimum crediting period but requires a minimum 40-year post-crediting monitoring commitment. Gold Standard mandates 30–50 years. VCS Standard §3.9.3 ↗ · Isometric Protocol §10 ↗ · GS AR Methodology §21 ↗
years
Verra VM0047
Min. 20 yr, renewable
Isometric
No minimum; 40 yr monitoring req.
Gold Standard
30–50 yr required
iSelecting the correct biome automatically suggests the IPCC default root-to-shoot ratio for belowground biomass. All three methodologies accept IPCC Tier 1 biome-level values as defaults, but allow site-specific allometric data to be substituted where available. If you have site-specific data, override the BGB ratio manually below. IPCC 2006 GL Vol. 4, Table 4.4 ↗
iCountry shown on the results page and used for methodology-specific eligibility checks. Verra VM0047 projects in active REDD+ countries require nesting in a jurisdictional programme for CORSIA eligibility. Isometric flags elevated land tenure risk in certain governance contexts. Gold Standard is globally applicable but requires the host country government to approve the project via a Letter of Authorisation for Article 6 purposes. VM0047 v1.1 ↗ · Isometric Protocol §4 ↗ · GS4GG Activity Requirements ↗
Carbon Sequestration
iThe average rate at which the planted forest sequesters carbon across the crediting period, expressed as tonnes of CO₂ equivalent per hectare per year. This is the single most important input — a ±10% error flows directly into all credit estimates. Derived from species-specific allometric equations applied to field plot measurements, or calibrated satellite/LiDAR models. All three methodologies accept this value but differ in how uncertainty is handled: Verra applies a measurement uncertainty discount; Isometric uses a biomass quantification uncertainty deduction; Gold Standard recommends conservative national defaults. Use combined AGB + BGB (belowground biomass is accounted for separately via the root-to-shoot ratio below). IPCC 2006 GL Vol. 4, Ch. 4 ↗ · VM0047 §8 ↗ · Isometric §11 ↗ · GS AR §8 ↗
tCO₂e/ha/yr
iThe ratio of belowground (root) biomass to aboveground (shoot) biomass. Used to estimate total tree biomass carbon from above-ground measurements alone. All three methodologies accept IPCC Tier 1 default values; site-specific data from destructive root sampling or published regional studies may be substituted where available and documented. Values typically range from 0.20 (tropical moist) to 0.32 (tropical dry/shrubland). IPCC 2006 GL Vol. 4, Table 4.4 ↗ · VM0047 §8.3 ↗ · Isometric §11 ↗ · GS AR §8 ↗
iThe proportion of planted trees expected to survive and reach maturity over the crediting period. Derived from species performance data, nursery records, and historical outcomes in climatically similar projects. Typical values range from 65–90% depending on species, site quality, and aftercare regime. Lower survival in early years can be offset by gap-filling (replanting), which should be reflected in your sequestration rate estimate. All three methodologies require this to be documented and periodically verified against field monitoring data. VM0047 §8.3 ↗ · Isometric §11 ↗ · GS AR §8 ↗
%
Deductions & Adjustments
iThe rate at which carbon would accumulate on this land without the reforestation project — the counterfactual baseline. This deduction ensures only additional carbon storage is credited. Each methodology calculates this differently: Verra uses a dynamic performance benchmark; Isometric uses matched control pixels with an uncertainty adjustment; Gold Standard uses a fixed historical BAU baseline. Use the Calculate in detail link below for a guided calculation. VM0047 §6 ↗ · Isometric §6 ↗ · GS AR §10 ↗
Verra
tCO₂e/ha/yr
Isometric
tCO₂e/ha/yr
Gold Std.
tCO₂e/ha/yr
iGHG emissions generated by running the project — site clearance, planting, fertiliser application, MRV activities, staff travel, and (under Isometric) end-of-life monitoring. These are deducted from gross removals to give net credits. Isometric requires a full cradle-to-grave LCA; Verra and Gold Standard require establishment and operational emissions only. Use the Calculate in detail link below. VM0047 §7 ↗ · Isometric §7 ↗ · GS LUF §7 ↗
Verra
tCO₂e/ha/yr
Isometric
tCO₂e/ha/yr
Gold Std.
tCO₂e/ha/yr
iThe share of gross removals deducted to account for GHG emissions displaced outside the project boundary — e.g. farmers whose land was converted moving to clear forest elsewhere. Verra uses the VMD0054 module; Isometric separates activity-shifting and market leakage; Gold Standard uses conservative national defaults documented in the PDD. Typical values range from 3–20%. Use the Calculate in detail link below. VMD0054 ↗ · Isometric §8 ↗ · GS LUF §8.2.2 ↗
Verra
%
Isometric
%
Gold Std.
%
Verra VM0047 — Specific Inputs
iVerra requires all AFOLU projects to contribute a percentage of credits to a pooled buffer account to cover the risk of future reversals (e.g. fire, disease, political instability). Determined by scoring your project against Verra's AFOLU Non-Permanence Risk Tool (NPRT) — a structured questionnaire covering ecological, socio-economic, and governance factors. Low = 10%; Medium = 15%; High = 20%. By contrast, Isometric reassesses reversal risk dynamically at each verification and Gold Standard applies a fixed 20% buffer to all LUF projects regardless of risk score. Verra AFOLU Non-Permanence Risk Tool v4.0 ↗ · VCS Standard §4.6 ↗ · GS AR Methodology (§ buffer) ↗
iWhere the relative uncertainty of biomass estimates exceeds 10%, Verra requires a deduction from issuable credits, quantified by propagation-of-error analysis applied to allometric equations and field plot data. Isometric handles this separately via its biomass quantification uncertainty tier (see below). Gold Standard does not apply a numerical uncertainty discount but requires conservative assumptions to be documented in the PDD — higher uncertainty is addressed through selection of more cautious default values. VM0047 §9 ↗ · Isometric §11 ↗ · GS AR §9 ↗
Isometric Protocol — Specific Inputs
iIsometric's reversal risk score covers fire, drought, pest, governance, and land tenure risks, reassessed dynamically at each verification — unlike Verra's fixed NPRT score. Very low = 5%; Low = 10%; Moderate = 15%; High = 20%. Gold Standard does not use a risk-tiered buffer: it applies a fixed 20% non-permanence buffer to all LUF/ARR projects, regardless of site conditions. Isometric Protocol §9 ↗ · Verra AFOLU NPRT (for comparison) ↗ · GS AR Methodology (fixed 20% buffer) ↗
iIsometric deducts a percentage from credited removals based on the quality of the measurement method: field plots only (high, >25% → 15% deduction); field plots + LiDAR (moderate, 15–25% → 10%); satellite + ML (low, <15% → 5%). Verra handles uncertainty separately through its measurement uncertainty discount. Gold Standard does not apply a tiered deduction but requires conservative assumptions to be documented — invest in better MRV to justify lower conservativeness factors. Isometric Protocol §11 ↗ · VM0047 §9 ↗ · GS AR §9 ↗
iAt each verification, Isometric compares project pixels to matched control pixels to re-estimate the counterfactual baseline. Because no set of control pixels is a perfect match, a percentage reduction is applied for this uncertainty (~8% default). Verra does not use control pixels — it uses a performance benchmark updated at each verification via remote sensing of comparable land. Gold Standard uses a fixed historical BAU baseline set ex-ante, with no dynamic adjustment. Isometric Protocol §6 ↗ · VM0047 §6 (Performance Benchmark) ↗ · GS AR §10 (Baseline) ↗
%
Gold Standard AR — Specific Inputs
iGold Standard requires a minimum of 3 UN SDG contributions to be identified, monitored, and reported throughout the crediting period — a unique requirement not found in VM0047 or the Isometric Protocol. Verra encourages but does not mandate SDG co-benefit reporting (CCB Standards provide an optional add-on). Isometric similarly does not require SDG monitoring as a condition of credit issuance. This field affects Gold Standard eligibility only. GS4GG Activity Requirements §4 ↗ · Verra CCB Standards (optional) ↗
Resources
Estimated Carbon Credits
Issuable credits after all deductions — Verra VM0047 v1.1 and Isometric Reforestation Protocol v1.1 compared.
Credit issuance comparison
Verra VM0047
Total VCUs (lifetime)
—
credits
—
Isometric
Total credits (lifetime)
—
credits
—
Gold Standard AR
Total GSVERs (lifetime)
—
GSVERs
—
Gross sequestration (pre-deductions)
—
Verra
VM0047 — Afforestation, Reforestation & Revegetation v1.1
Area-based approach · VCS Program · ICVCM CCP-approved
Gross sequestration (AGB + BGB, survival-adjusted)—
Of which: belowground biomass (BGB)—
Less: Baseline / counterfactual—
Less: Project activity emissions—
Less: Leakage deduction—
Net creditable carbon removals—
Less: Buffer pool (non-permanence risk)—
Less: Measurement uncertainty discount—
Issuable VCUs (lifetime)—
VM0047 uses the AFOLU Non-Permanence Risk Tool to set buffer contributions (10–20% for ARR projects). Leakage quantified via VMD0054.
Verra VM0047 eligibility No eligibility issues identified.
Isometric
Reforestation Protocol v1.1 — Biosphere Protocol
Isometric Registry · ICVCM CCP-approved
Gross sequestration (AGB + BGB, survival-adjusted)—
Of which: belowground biomass (BGB)—
Less: Dynamic baseline (counterfactual)—
Less: Dynamic baseline adjustment (control-plot)—
Less: Project activity emissions (cradle-to-grave LCA)—
Less: Leakage (activity-shifting + market)—
Net creditable carbon removals—
Less: Buffer pool (reversal risk)—
Less: Biomass quantification uncertainty—
Issuable credits (lifetime)—
Isometric uses dynamic baselines reset against matched control pixels at each verification. Cradle-to-grave LCA scope is broader than VM0047.
Isometric eligibility No eligibility issues identified.
Gold Standard
AR GHG Emissions Reductions & Sequestration Methodology v2.1
GS4GG · Gold Standard for the Global Goals · ICVCM CCP-eligible
Gross sequestration (AGB + BGB, survival-adjusted)—
Of which: belowground biomass (BGB)—
Less: Baseline / counterfactual—
Less: Project activity emissions—
Less: Leakage deduction—
Net creditable carbon removals—
Less: Compliance buffer (fixed 20% — all LUF projects)—
Issuable GSVERs (lifetime)—
Gold Standard requires a fixed 20% buffer contribution for all LUF projects — this cannot be reduced based on risk. Crediting period must be 30–50 years. Minimum 3 SDG contributions must be monitored and reported.
Gold Standard eligibility No eligibility issues identified.
Estimated credit value
Indicative revenue range after registry fees · Sylvera State of Carbon Credits 2025 ↗
Verra VM0047
Standard VCU · ICVCM CCP-approved
Gross revenue (low: $14/t)
—
Gross revenue (high: $26/t, BBB+)
—
Less: Registry fees ($0.27/VCU)
Issuance $0.23 + transfer $0.02 + retirement $0.02
—
Net revenue after fees
Low estimate
—
High estimate (BBB+)
—
Fee source: Verra Fee Schedule v1.0 (Dec 2024) ↗
Isometric
Biosphere Protocol · ICVCM CCP-approved
Gross revenue (low: $18/t)
—
Gross revenue (high: $30/t)
—
Registry fees: not publicly listed
Isometric does not publish a per-credit fee schedule. Fees are typically embedded in verification costs or negotiated as part of offtake agreements. Contact Isometric directly for current fee information.
Indicative revenue
Low estimate
—
High estimate
—
Fee info: Isometric Registry ↗ · Fees not publicly disclosed; no deduction applied above.
Gold Standard AR
GS4GG · ICVCM CCP-approved · SDG-linked
Gross revenue (low: $20/t)
—
Gross revenue (high: $40/t, 5+ SDGs)
—
Less: Registry fees ($0.29/GSVER)
Issuance $0.25 + transfer $0.02 + retirement $0.02. Add $0.05/credit for Article 6 label.
—
Net revenue after fees
Low estimate
—
High estimate (5+ SDGs)
—
Fee source: GS Fee Schedule v3.1 (Jul 2025) ↗
Registry fees deducted above are per-credit charges levied at issuance, transfer, and retirement — they are separate from third-party VVB verification costs (typically $15,000–$50,000 per verification event) and do not include project development, monitoring, or legal costs. Gross revenue ranges reflect 2025 voluntary market transaction data for ARR credits (Sylvera, MSCI, Fastmarkets). Actual net revenue will vary by region, vintage, buyer type, and contract structure.
Sources: Sylvera State of Carbon Credits 2025 ↗ · MSCI Carbon Market Data ↗ · Fastmarkets ARR pricing ↗ · Verra Fee Schedule v1.0 ↗ · GS Fee Schedule v3.1 ↗
Sources: Sylvera State of Carbon Credits 2025 ↗ · MSCI Carbon Market Data ↗ · Fastmarkets ARR pricing ↗ · Verra Fee Schedule v1.0 ↗ · GS Fee Schedule v3.1 ↗
Indicative estimates only. Actual credit issuance requires site-specific data collection, third-party validation/verification (VVB), and formal registration on the relevant registry. All figures in tCO₂e (100-year GWP, IPCC AR6).
Baseline & Counterfactual
Quantify what would have happened to carbon stocks on your project land without the reforestation intervention — the counterfactual scenario that defines additionality.
Prior Land Use & Vegetation
What existed on site before the project
Land cover before project
iExpected rate of carbon accumulation if the land were left unmanaged (spontaneous natural regeneration). Forms the counterfactual baseline for all three methodologies, though each calculates it differently: Verra uses this in its performance benchmark; Isometric uses control pixel matching; Gold Standard uses a historical BAU value. Default values are pre-filled from prior land use type based on IPCC regional data — override with site-specific measurements where available. IPCC 2006 GL Vol. 4, Ch. 4 ↗ · VM0047 §6 ↗ · Isometric §6 ↗ · GS AR §10 ↗
tCO₂e/ha/yr
iProbability per year that counterfactual land (i.e. land left unmanaged) would experience a disturbance event such as fire, drought, or agricultural conversion that reduces carbon stocks. Used by all three methodologies to adjust the baseline downward to realistic conditions. Derive from national fire statistics, FAO disturbance data, or local risk assessments. IPCC 2006 GL Vol. 4 ↗ · VM0047 §6.3 ↗ · Isometric §6.2 ↗ · GS AR §10 ↗
%/yr
Methodology Treatment
How each standard defines the baseline
Verra VM0047
Uses a dynamic performance benchmark (PB) derived from matched control plots observed via remote sensing at each verification. The crediting baseline equals carbon stock change on comparable unmanaged land. Updated at every verification — not a fixed ex-ante value.
Isometric Reforestation Protocol v1.1
Uses dynamic baselining with matched control pixels from a Zone of Eligibility around the project. Control pixels must have been unforested for at least 10 years. An additional dynamic baseline uncertainty adjustment is applied at each verification cycle.
Gold Standard AR v2.1
Uses a historical business-as-usual (BAU) baseline established from land use records over the reference period. The baseline is not dynamically adjusted using control plots — it is set ex-ante and held fixed for the crediting period. GS4GG recommends using conservative national or regional default values where site-specific data is unavailable. The baseline crediting period must be between 30 and 50 years. GS AR Methodology §10 ↗
Key difference
Isometric applies a dynamic control-pixel adjustment at each verification. VM0047 uses a performance benchmark updated each cycle. Gold Standard uses a fixed historical baseline — simpler but potentially less accurate over long crediting periods.
Isometric — control-plot adjustment
iIsometric applies this percentage reduction to the net baseline rate to account for imperfect matching between project pixels and reference control pixels in the Zone of Eligibility. Default ~8% reflects typical matching quality. Verra does not use control pixels — it uses a performance benchmark that is not subject to this adjustment. Gold Standard uses a fixed historical BAU baseline with no dynamic matching, so this field is Isometric-specific only. Isometric Protocol §6 ↗ · VM0047 §6 (no equivalent) ↗
%
Additionality context
iAll three methodologies require projects to demonstrate financial additionality — that the reforestation would not have happened without carbon finance. Predominantly government-funded or mandated activities typically fail this test. Verra uses a barrier analysis or performance benchmark; Isometric requires explicit evidence the project would not occur without carbon revenue; Gold Standard uses a financial additionality tool. VCS Standard §3.5 ↗ · Isometric Protocol §4 ↗ · GS4GG Additionality Requirements ↗
iAll three methodologies require that the project activity is not already widespread common practice in the region. Verra uses a performance benchmark — if ≥15% of comparable land is already being reforested, additionality cannot be claimed. Isometric explicitly excludes regions where reforestation is already driven by policy or market demand without carbon finance. Gold Standard uses a common practice analysis as part of its additionality demonstration. VM0047 §5 (Additionality) ↗ · Isometric Protocol §4 ↗ · GS4GG Additionality Requirements ↗
Baseline Results
Recommended values per methodology
Verra VM0047
—tCO₂e/ha/yr
Performance benchmark: natural regen less disturbance risk
Isometric
—tCO₂e/ha/yr
Dynamic baseline: natural regen less disturbance & control-plot adjustment
Gold Standard
—tCO₂e/ha/yr
Historical/BAU baseline with conservative default values recommended
| Component | Verra | Isometric | Gold Std. |
|---|---|---|---|
| Natural vegetation regrowth | — | — | — |
| Less: Disturbance risk adjustment | — | — | — |
| Less: Control-plot matching adj. (Isometric only) | n/a | — | n/a |
| Net baseline carbon accumulation | — | — | — |
Verra VM0047 No eligibility issues identified.
Isometric No eligibility issues identified.
Gold Standard No eligibility issues identified.
Project Activity Emissions
Estimate GHG emissions from all project activities across the full project lifecycle — from site preparation through to ongoing post-crediting monitoring.
Establishment Emissions
One-off activities at project start
Site preparation (one-off, tCO₂e/ha total)
iGHG emissions from machinery used for land preparation — ploughing, clearing, terracing. One-off cost amortised over the crediting period. Required by all three methodologies as part of project activity emissions. Estimate from machinery hours × fuel consumption × IPCC emission factors for the fuel type. VM0047 §7 ↗ · Isometric §7 (LCA A4) ↗ · GS LUF Activity Req. §7 ↗
tCO₂e/ha
tCO₂e/ha
tCO₂e/ha
iEmbodied carbon in fencing, access tracks, signs, and infrastructure. Isometric requires this as part of its cradle-to-grave LCA (modules A1–A5). Verra recommends including material emissions but does not mandate the same rigour. Gold Standard recommends using national/international default emission factors for material quantities. Isometric Protocol §7 (LCA A1–A5) ↗ · VM0047 §7 ↗ · GS LUF Activity Req. §7 ↗
tCO₂e/ha
tCO₂e/ha
Annual operational emissions (tCO₂e/ha/yr)
iAnnual operational emissions from ongoing management activities: weeding, pest control, replanting mortality gaps, and equipment fuel use. Required by all three methodologies as part of project activity emissions. Estimate from operational plans or benchmark against similar projects. VM0047 §7 ↗ · Isometric §7 (B6) ↗ · GS LUF Activity Req. §7 ↗
tCO₂e/ha/yr
iDirect N₂O emissions from nitrogen-based fertilisers applied to the project area. Use IPCC Tier 1 emission factor (1% of applied N converted to N₂O-N). Enter zero if no fertiliser is applied — typical for native species reforestation. Required by all three methodologies where fertiliser is used. IPCC 2006 GL Vol. 4, Ch. 11 ↗ · VM0047 §7 ↗ · Isometric §7 ↗ · GS LUF §7 ↗
tCO₂e/ha/yr
iEmissions from annual monitoring activities — field plot surveys, drone/LiDAR flights, satellite data acquisition, VVB site visits, and report preparation. Required by all three methodologies. Isometric specifically includes MRV in its full LCA scope; Verra and Gold Standard require it as a project activity emission. Estimate from travel distance, flight hours, and equipment energy use using DEFRA or IPCC factors. VM0047 §7 ↗ · Isometric Protocol §11 ↗ · GS LUF Activity Req. §7 ↗ · DEFRA 2024 conversion factors ↗
tCO₂e/ha/yr
tCO₂e/ha/yr
End-of-Life & Methodology Notes
Post-crediting obligations
End-of-life / post-crediting period
iPost-crediting monitoring emissions for the mandatory durability period. Isometric requires a minimum of 40 years post-crediting monitoring. Verra does not currently mandate a fixed post-crediting monitoring period but does require ongoing buffer pool management. Gold Standard requires permanence obligations to be met for the duration agreed in the PDD. Isometric Protocol §10 ↗ · VCS Standard §4.13 ↗ · GS AR §22 (Permanence) ↗
tCO₂e/ha/yr
tCO₂e/ha/yr
years
iDuration of required post-crediting monitoring. Isometric minimum is 40 years — this field drives the amortisation of end-of-life emissions in the Isometric calculation. Verra does not specify a mandatory minimum post-crediting monitoring period. Gold Standard requires permanence obligations to be met for the duration set in the PDD — typically aligned with the crediting period length. Isometric Protocol §10 ↗ · GS AR §22 ↗
years
Verra VM0047
Accounts for planting equipment, fertiliser N₂O, and operational activities. End-of-life emissions are not explicitly required. Embodied material emissions are recommended but not mandated with the same rigour as Isometric.
Isometric — cradle-to-grave LCA
Requires a full lifecycle GHG statement: establishment (A1–A5), operations, end-of-life monitoring, and transport. Materiality threshold: emissions <1% of total removals may be excluded.
Gold Standard AR v2.1
Scope is similar to Verra: establishment and operational emissions are required; end-of-life monitoring emissions are not explicitly mandated. GS4GG recommends using national or international default emission factors (e.g. IPCC Tier 1 values, DEFRA conversion factors) rather than requiring project-specific measurement for every source. This typically results in lower data collection burden than Isometric's full LCA. GS LUF Activity Requirements §7 ↗
Emissions Results
Annual average per methodology
Verra VM0047
—tCO₂e/ha/yr
Establishment + operations (no end-of-life required)
Isometric
—tCO₂e/ha/yr
Full cradle-to-grave LCA including end-of-life monitoring
Gold Standard
—tCO₂e/ha/yr
Establishment + operations; national/international defaults recommended
| Source | Verra | Isometric | Gold Std. |
|---|---|---|---|
| Establishment (amortised) | — | — | — |
| Annual operational emissions | — | — | — |
| End-of-life / monitoring (amortised) | not req. | — | not req. |
| Total annualised emissions | — | — | — |
Isometric note: End-of-life emissions are amortised across crediting + monitoring period. Verra only requires crediting-period tracking, so its figure will typically be lower.
Verra VM0047 No eligibility issues identified.
Isometric No eligibility issues identified.
Gold Standard No eligibility issues identified.
Leakage Assessment
Estimate GHG emissions displaced outside your project boundary as a result of the reforestation intervention — covering activity-shifting and market leakage pathways.
Pre-Project Productivity & Land Use
What activities are displaced by the project
Activity-shifting leakage
t/ha/yr
iThe proportion of the project area where the prior land use activity is being displaced by the reforestation. Required by all three methodologies to quantify activity-shifting leakage. Often 100% for full agricultural land conversion; may be lower if part of the project area was already unproductive or degraded. VMD0054 ↗ · Isometric §8.2 ↗ · GS LUF §8.2.2 ↗
% of project
iWhether the project has implemented measures to prevent displaced actors from clearing land elsewhere (alternative livelihoods, resource access schemes). Isometric Protocol §8.3 requires full mitigation of all displaced subsistence users as a hard eligibility condition — partial mitigation renders the project ineligible. Verra allows partial mitigation credit under VMD0054 without an eligibility threshold. Gold Standard requires mitigation measures to be described and monitored in the PDD. Isometric Protocol §8.3 ↗ · VMD0054 §5 ↗ · GS LUF §8.2.2 ↗
Market leakage
iThe project area's displaced production as a share of total regional supply of the relevant commodity. Small projects (<1% of regional supply) have negligible market leakage. Required by all three methodologies, though the framework used to convert it into a leakage deduction differs: Verra uses VMD0054; Isometric uses the PPP × NL × EF framework (Appendix A); Gold Standard uses conservative national defaults documented in the PDD. VMD0054 §5 ↗ · Isometric §8.3 ↗ · GS LUF §8.2.2 ↗
%
iCarbon stock lost per hectare when new land is converted to replace displaced production (tropical forests 200–400 tCO₂e/ha; temperate 80–150; grassland/savanna 40–100). Used by all three methodologies to calculate market leakage. Use IPCC Tier 1 national-level or biome-level carbon stock data. IPCC 2006 GL Vol. 4, Table 4.7 ↗ · VMD0054 ↗ · Isometric §8.3 Appendix A ↗ · GS LUF §8.2.2 ↗
tCO₂e/ha
Methodology Treatment
How each standard handles leakage
Verra VM0047 + VMD0054
Area-based projects must apply VMD0054 to estimate leakage from displacement of pre-project agricultural activities. The deduction is based on displaced commodity productivity × emission factor for converted land, adjusted for the proportion likely to cause land conversion elsewhere.
Isometric Reforestation Protocol v1.1
Separates into three types: activity-shifting (displacement of identifiable actors), market leakage (indirect supply-demand effects), and ecological leakage (assumed zero in v1.1). Uses the PPP × NL × EF framework with Appendix A defaults.
Gold Standard AR v2.1
Leakage must be assessed and deducted from net removals. GS4GG recommends using conservative national or international default values rather than project-specific measurement. The methodology does not prescribe a specific leakage framework (unlike VMD0054) — the project developer selects a defensible approach and documents it in the Project Design Document. The fixed 20% non-permanence buffer is applied separately and does not reduce the leakage requirement. GS LUF Activity Requirements §8.2.2 ↗
All three methodologies
Leakage mitigation activities (alternative livelihoods, sustainable intensification nearby) can reduce the deduction. Under Isometric, full mitigation of activity-shifting also satisfies market leakage requirements. Gold Standard allows mitigation to be documented in the PDD to reduce the conservative leakage estimate.
Verra-specific: VMD0054 NL factor
iVMD0054 uses a displacement factor (NL) specific to the commodity type and regional market. Default is 20% for commercial cropland; higher for intensive commodity production (35–50%). Isometric uses its own Appendix A NL values (selected in the market leakage section above). Gold Standard does not use a prescribed NL framework — the developer documents a conservative national/international default in the PDD, often equivalent to 10–20%. VMD0054 §4 ↗ · Isometric Protocol Appendix A ↗ · GS LUF §8.2.2 ↗
Leakage Results
Leakage factor per methodology
Verra VM0047
—%
VMD0054: productivity × EF × NL
Isometric
—%
Activity-shifting + market (PPP × NL × EF)
Gold Standard
—%
Conservative default — national/international values recommended
| Component | Verra | Isometric | Gold Std. |
|---|---|---|---|
| Activity-shifting leakage (gross) | — | — | — |
| Less: Mitigation credit | — | — | — |
| Market leakage | — | — | — |
| Total net leakage (tCO₂e/ha/yr) | — | — | — |
| As % of gross sequestration | — | — | — |
Verra VM0047 No eligibility issues identified.
Isometric No eligibility issues identified.
Gold Standard No eligibility issues identified.
Input Checklist
All required fields across the main calculator and detail sub-pages — with data sources and guidance notes for each parameter.
Manually confirmed
Default value applied
Requires your input
Main Calculator
Project parameters entered on the main page
Site & Scale
Project area hectares
Total area of land enrolled in the project. Both methodologies require a clearly defined and legally secured project boundary. Minimum 1 ha for area-based approach under VM0047.
Crediting period years
Duration over which carbon removals are credited. VM0047 requires a minimum of 20 years. Isometric does not specify a minimum crediting period but requires a minimum 40-year post-crediting monitoring period.
Forest biome
Ecosystem type of the project area. Used to auto-suggest the IPCC default root-to-shoot ratio. Affects biomass carbon accounting.
Source: IPCC 2006 GL Vol. 4, Ch. 4 ↗
Country / region
Project host country. Used for country-level eligibility checks including REDD+ nesting requirements (Verra) and land tenure risk (Isometric). Displayed on the results page.
Source: VM0047 v1.1 ↗ · ICAO CORSIA eligible units ↗
Carbon Sequestration
Mean annual sequestration rate tCO₂e/ha/yr
Average annual carbon removal rate across the crediting period for aboveground + belowground biomass combined. Typically derived from allometric equations applied to field plot data or calibrated remote sensing models. This is the single most important input — a ±10% error here flows through to all credit estimates.
Source: Field measurement / allometric models. See IPCC 2006 GL Vol. 4, Ch. 4 ↗
Root-to-shoot ratio (BGB factor)
Ratio of belowground to aboveground biomass. Used to estimate total biomass carbon from above-ground measurements. IPCC default values used unless site-specific data is available.
Source: IPCC 2006 GL Vol. 4, Table 4.4 ↗
Tree survival rate %
Percentage of planted trees expected to survive over the crediting period. Based on species performance data, site conditions, and historical planting outcomes in similar environments. Required by both methodologies to ensure only creditable biomass is counted.
Source: Project-specific nursery / field data or regional studies
Deductions & Adjustments
Baseline / counterfactual sequestration tCO₂e/ha/yr VerraIsometric
Carbon that would accumulate on the project land without the reforestation intervention. Calculated in the Baseline detail page. Both methodologies use dynamic baselines — Verra via a performance benchmark; Isometric via matched control pixels with an additional uncertainty adjustment.
Project activity emissions tCO₂e/ha/yr VerraIsometric
GHG emissions from project activities. Calculated in the Emissions detail page. Verra requires establishment and operational emissions; Isometric requires a full cradle-to-grave lifecycle assessment including end-of-life monitoring emissions.
Leakage factor % VerraIsometric
GHG emissions displaced outside the project boundary as a result of the reforestation activity. Calculated in the Leakage detail page. Verra uses VMD0054; Isometric separates activity-shifting and market leakage using the PPP × NL × EF framework.
Verra VM0047 — Specific Inputs
Non-permanence risk rating Verra only
Risk that credited carbon removals will be reversed before the end of the crediting period. Determined using Verra's AFOLU Non-Permanence Risk Tool, which scores fire risk, political risk, ecological risk, and project management quality. Low = 10% buffer; Medium = 15%; High = 20%.
Measurement uncertainty discount Verra only
Deduction applied where measurement uncertainty exceeds 10% relative error. Calculated from the uncertainty analysis of biomass estimates. Projects achieving <10% uncertainty apply no deduction; 10–20% → 5%; 20–30% → 10%.
Source: VM0047 v1.1 §9 (Uncertainty) ↗
Isometric Protocol — Specific Inputs
Reversal risk category Isometric only
Isometric's reversal risk assessment covers fire, drought, pest, governance, and land tenure risks. Unlike Verra, this is reassessed dynamically at each verification period. Very low = 5% buffer; Low = 10%; Moderate = 15%; High = 20%.
Biomass quantification uncertainty Isometric only
Reflects the quality of the measurement method used — field plots only, field plots + LiDAR, or satellite + ML models. Low (<15%) → 5% deduction; Moderate (15–25%) → 10%; High (>25%) → 15%.
Dynamic baseline adjustment % Isometric only
Estimated percentage reduction applied to the baseline to account for imperfect matching of control pixels in the Zone of Eligibility. Reflects the uncertainty inherent in selecting comparable reference plots. Default 8% based on Isometric protocol guidance.
Gold Standard AR — Specific Inputs
SDG contributions monitored Gold Standard only
Gold Standard requires a minimum of 3 UN Sustainable Development Goal contributions to be identified, monitored, and reported throughout the crediting period. These must be material co-benefits of the project (e.g. SDG 13 Climate Action, SDG 15 Life on Land, SDG 8 Decent Work). SDG monitoring plans must be approved at validation.
Leakage deduction — conservative estimate % Gold Standard only
Gold Standard recommends using conservative national or international default leakage values rather than a prescribed framework. The project developer selects a defensible approach and documents it in the Project Design Document. The fixed 20% non-permanence buffer is applied separately and does not substitute for the leakage deduction. Typical values range from 3–15% depending on prior land use and displacement risk.
Baseline & Counterfactual Sub-page
Inputs for calculating the baseline sequestration rate
Land Cover Before Project
Prior land use type
Land use classification for the project area in the 3–10 years before project start. Used to auto-suggest default natural regeneration rates and disturbance risk values. Required by both methodologies as part of the baseline scenario description.
Source: Land registry / national land use maps. See IPCC 2006 GL Vol. 4 ↗
Natural regeneration rate tCO₂e/ha/yr
Expected rate of carbon accumulation on the project land if left unmanaged (spontaneous natural regeneration). This forms the core of the dynamic performance benchmark (Verra) and counterfactual baseline (Isometric). Typically derived from control plot data or regional studies.
Source: Site-specific control plot data or IPCC 2006 GL Vol. 4, Ch. 4 ↗
Annual disturbance / loss risk %/yr
Probability per year that the counterfactual baseline land would experience a disturbance event (fire, conversion, drought) that would reduce carbon stocks. Used to adjust the net baseline accumulation rate downward to reflect realistic conditions.
Source: National fire statistics, FAO forest disturbance data, or local risk assessments
Isometric — Control-Plot Adjustment
Control-pixel matching uncertainty adjustment % Isometric only
Additional deduction applied by Isometric to account for imperfect matching between project pixels and control pixels in the Zone of Eligibility. Reflects the uncertainty that control pixels may not perfectly represent the counterfactual. Protocol default is approximately 8%.
Additionality Context
Government reforestation mandate or subsidy?
Whether the project benefits from a government mandate or public funding. Predominantly government-funded projects may fail additionality under both methodologies. Significant public funding (>50% of costs) is likely to disqualify the project.
Is reforestation common practice in the region?
Whether reforestation is already widespread in the region without carbon finance. VM0047 uses a common practice benchmark — if ≥15% of comparable land is already being reforested at national/sub-national level, additionality cannot be claimed. Isometric explicitly excludes such regions.
Project Activity Emissions Sub-page
Inputs for calculating project-related GHG emissions
Site Preparation — One-off Emissions (tCO₂e/ha total)
Site clearance & ground preparation
Fuel combustion emissions from machinery used for land preparation (ploughing, clearing, terracing). One-off cost amortised over the crediting period. Estimate from machinery hours × fuel consumption × IPCC emission factors for the fuel type used.
Source: Contractor records or IPCC 2006 GL Vol. 2, Ch. 3 (Mobile Combustion) ↗
Existing biomass removal / burning
CO₂ and non-CO₂ emissions from clearing and burning existing vegetation at project start. Measured from biomass surveys at T0. Both methodologies require this to be accounted for. Use zero if existing vegetation was removed mechanically without burning.
Source: Pre-project biomass survey. VM0047 v1.1 §7 ↗
Nursery operations & seedling production
Emissions from operating the nursery: electricity/fuel for irrigation, heating, and equipment. Often small but required by Isometric's LCA scope (Module A4). Use nursery energy bills or estimate from seedling volumes × benchmark emission factor.
Source: Nursery energy records or regional benchmark. Isometric Protocol v1.1 §7 ↗
Fencing & infrastructure (embodied emissions)
Embodied carbon in fencing, access tracks, signage, and other physical infrastructure. Required by Isometric's cradle-to-grave LCA (Modules A1–A5). Estimate from material quantities × product-specific EPD emission factors or industry averages.
Source: Material supply records or Ecoinvent database ↗. Isometric Protocol v1.1 §7 ↗
Seedling & materials transport to site
Fuel emissions from transporting seedlings, tools, fertiliser, and equipment to the project site. Estimate from vehicle type, load, and distance using IPCC or DEFRA emission factors for road freight.
Source: Logistics records or DEFRA 2024 conversion factors ↗
Annual Operational Emissions (tCO₂e/ha/yr)
Forest management & maintenance
Ongoing annual emissions from site maintenance: weeding, replanting mortality gaps, pest control, equipment fuel use. Estimated from activity-based records or benchmarked against similar projects.
Source: Operational plan / activity records
Fertiliser application (N₂O direct emissions)
Direct N₂O emissions from nitrogen-based fertilisers applied to the project area. Use IPCC Tier 1 emission factor (1% of applied N converted to N₂O-N). Enter zero if no fertiliser is applied — this is common for native species reforestation.
Monitoring, reporting & verification (MRV)
Emissions from annual monitoring activities: field plot surveys, drone/LiDAR flights, satellite data acquisition, and VVB site visits. Isometric requires this as part of the full LCA scope. Estimate from travel distance, flight hours, and equipment energy use.
Source: MRV plan / verification schedule. Isometric Protocol v1.1 §11 ↗
Staff & project travel (ongoing)
Annual emissions from project team travel to and from the site (vehicles, flights). Required by Isometric's LCA scope. Estimate from annual site visit frequency × distance × mode of transport using DEFRA/IPCC emission factors.
Source: Travel records or DEFRA 2024 conversion factors ↗
End-of-Life / Post-Crediting Period
Ongoing monitoring (post-crediting) Isometric — required
Annual monitoring costs during the mandatory post-crediting monitoring period. Isometric requires this as part of the cradle-to-grave LCA. Verra does not currently mandate end-of-life emissions accounting. Typically lower than crediting-period MRV due to reduced verification frequency.
Ongoing forest management (post-crediting) Isometric — required
Annual management costs after the crediting period ends — maintenance required to ensure the forest remains intact during the monitoring period. Amortised over the total commitment period (crediting + monitoring years).
Source: Isometric Protocol v1.1 §10 ↗
Crediting period years
Duration used to amortise establishment emissions across annual figures. Must be ≥20 years under VCS Standard §3.9.3 for VM0047 projects. Auto-synced from the main calculator crediting period input.
Source: VCS Standard v4.7 §3.9.3 ↗
Ongoing monitoring period years Isometric — minimum 40 years
Post-crediting monitoring duration. Isometric requires a minimum of 40 years to ensure permanence obligations are met and the carbon store is maintained. This affects the amortisation of end-of-life emissions.
Leakage Assessment Sub-page
Inputs for estimating displaced emissions
Activity-Shifting Leakage
Primary prior land use / commodity
The main land use or commodity production that is displaced by the reforestation project. Determines the activity-shifting emission factor. Subsistence crops trigger additional Isometric eligibility requirements. Use 'None' for bare or degraded land with no prior productive use.
Source: Land use records / project design document. VMD0054 ↗
Annual productivity (pre-project, 3-yr average) t/ha/yr
Average annual yield of the displaced commodity over the three years prior to project start. Required by VMD0054 and Isometric's PPP framework. Use government agricultural statistics, contractor records, or remotely-sensed productivity data.
Source: 3-year average from agricultural records. VMD0054 §4 ↗
Area of displaced activity % of project
Proportion of the project area where the prior land use activity is being displaced. Often 100% for agricultural land conversion. May be less than 100% if part of the project area was already unproductive.
Source: Land use mapping / project design document
Activity-shifting mitigation in place?
Whether the project has put in place measures to prevent displaced actors from clearing land elsewhere (alternative livelihoods, access to other resources). Isometric Protocol §8.3 requires full mitigation for displaced subsistence users as a condition of project eligibility.
Source: Community engagement plan. Isometric Protocol v1.1 §8.3 ↗
Market Leakage
Project area as share of regional supply %
The project area's displaced production as a percentage of total regional supply of the relevant commodity. Small projects (<1%) have negligible market leakage. Larger projects reduce regional supply, inducing land conversion elsewhere to compensate.
Source: Regional agricultural supply data (FAO, national statistics). VMD0054 §5 ↗
Supply response / land conversion rate — NL (Isometric)
The fraction of the project's displaced production that leads to new land conversion elsewhere. Known as the NL parameter in Isometric's Appendix A. Default value 15% for most commercial crops. Higher for high-demand commodities like soy, palm oil, or cattle.
Emission factor of converted land tCO₂e/ha
Carbon stock lost per hectare when new land is converted to replace displaced production. Tropical forests: 200–400 tCO₂e/ha; temperate: 80–150 tCO₂e/ha; grassland/savanna: 40–100 tCO₂e/ha. Use IPCC or national-level carbon stock data for the relevant biome.
Verra-specific: VMD0054 NL Factor
Verra displacement factor — NL (VMD0054) Verra only
The NL parameter under VMD0054 — the fraction of displaced production that causes land conversion elsewhere. VMD0054 default is 20% for commercial cropland; higher for intensive commodity production. Different from Isometric's NL as the two frameworks treat market leakage differently.
Checklist progress
0 of 46 fields confirmed