General eligibility criteria
All projects must meet the 12 general eligibility criteria described below. Detailed instructions and examples are presented in Methodologies.
1
Measurability
The GHG emission reductions are quantitatively, rigorously, and conservatively measured.
2
Real
The GHG emissions reductions have actually occurred, according to the monitoring plan. RCCs are ex-post.
3
Additionality
The mitigation activity would not have occurred without the revenues from carbon finance.
4
Permanence and risk of reversal
Carbon will be removed for at least 100 years (applicable for removal RCCs only).
5
No double counting
Mitigation activities are only counted once, and are not double used, issued or claimed.
6
Co-benefits
Projects must deliver additional positive impact towards environmental and social sustainability.
7
Substitution
The products/services generated as project outputs must appropriately, realistically, and efficiently substitute those of the baseline scenario, rather than create new demand.
8
Environmental & social do no harm
Projects must not contribute to environmental or social damage.
9
Leakage
The project’s avoided GHG emissions must not be indirectly transferred elsewhere via activity shifting.
10
TRL
The technology readiness level must be 6 or higher.
11
Targets alignment
Project’s emission reductions must be aligned with the European Union’s emission reduction targets for their sector.
12
Minimum impact
Projects must qualify for a minimum amount of RCCs.
Measurability
Project Developers shall follow the approach outlined in the GHG reduction quantification section, based on , to measure GHG emissions reduction, avoidance and/or removal.
GHG emission reduction measurements shall aim for completeness, accuracy, transparency, and conservativeness.
Project Developers shall specify the Riverse methodology they follow to measure GHG emission reductions.
If no Riverse methodology exists for a given project, documented scientific research can be proposed to establish a measurement method. This method shall be evaluated and validated by the Riverse Climate team and the VVB.
GHG emission reduction measurements that meet the GHG reduction quantification requirements and follow a Riverse-approved sector-specific methodology (if available)
Real
All sites where the project operates shall be registered during the certification process. This includes all factories, facilities, or operations under direct control of the Project Developer, whose activities are involved in RCCs verification and issuance. Sites registration procedures are detailed in Section 4.3 of the Riverse Procedures Manual.
Upstream and downstream actors in the supply chain are not counted as project sites.
Site registration shall include the site’s:
purpose
relationship to the project
street address or, if not available, GPS coordinates
reference person
contact information
host country
📎 Supporting documents:
Site registration certificate
Site audit certificate and report
[conditional] If the project is under development, proof that it will actually occur
The Project Developer shall submit a Monitoring Plan during the validation step that defines the list of Key Impact Indicators (KII).
For each KII in the Monitoring Plan, the Project Developer shall specify the update frequency and auditable source.
KIIs shall meet the minimum requirements for Monitoring Plans detailed in the Methodology, if applicable, and meet KII requirements described in the Riverse Procedures Manual.
For each verification and issuance of RCCs, the Project Developer shall upload each KII with proof to the Impact Certification Platform.
📎 Supporting documents:
During validation: Monitoring Plan defining the Key Impact Indicators (KIIs) with examples of proof, source of the proof and update frequency.
During verification: values of KIIs with proof, uploaded to the Riverse certification platform.
Additionality
Regulatory surplus analysis: Mitigation activities must go beyond what is required by regulations.
Projects shall prove that:
there is no law, regulation, statute, legal ruling or other regulatory framework that makes the implementation of the project compulsory, and
if there is a regulation, their mitigation activities allow for more GHG emission reductions than what is required by regulations. In this case, only the project activities that surpass the mandated amount are eligible for RCCs.
📎 Supporting documents:
Description of the regulatory environment concerning the project’s mitigation activity.
Description of current and confirmed upcoming regulations or incentives that promote the project’s solution.
Permanence and risk of reversal
Projects eligible for removal RCCs are subject to the Permanence and risk of reversal criteria. Permanence and reversal risks are not evaluated for avoidance RCCs, because they are considered to have little to no material reversal risks.
By default, at least 3% of all verified removal RCCs shall be transferred to the buffer pool upon issuance.
Project Developers shall complete the Risk Assessment Template tailored to their specific project type, which is provided in the methodology documentation. This template guides Project Developers in evaluating the likelihood and severity of each risk type.
For each reversal risk type with a high or very high risk score, Project Developers shall develop a risk mitigation plan, or incur an additional 3% contribution of verified removal RCCs to the buffer pool.
The consequences of a carbon removal reversal are outlined in the Cancelation section of the Riverse Procedures Manual.
If no methodology exists, the Project Developer shall suggest risks to consider in the PDD, which must be approved by the Riverse Certification team and the VVB. Documentation and proof must be provided to justify that the identification of risks was performed with a similar level of rigor, scientific accuracy, and conservativeness that is required for methodology development.
📎Supporting documents:
Project Developer’s responses to the Risk Assessment Template evaluating reversal risks.
[conditional] If a risk has a high or very high risk of reversal, a risk mitigation plan, or signed agreement to contribute an extra 3% of verified removal RCCs to the buffer pool.
No double counting
Riverse’s Double Counting Policy provides full explanations and requirements regarding this eligibility criteria. Key points are summarized here.
Double use shall be prevented by the Riverse Registry, where each project is automatically assigned a unique identifier, with project ID, location, and Project Developer name and contact information. An immutable certificate is generated upon retirement.
Project Developers shall not use another program to issue carbon credits for the given mitigation activity, for the same year. Project Developers shall disclose any issuance of carbon credits for the same project prior to the crediting period, or with a different project scope.
Project Developers shall ensure that specified upstream and downstream actors in the supply chain have not and will not issue carbon credits for their role in the mitigation activity. Specific requirements on this topic may be made in methodologies.
Double issuance is prevented by the signing of the Riverse MRV & Registry Terms & Conditions, where all Project Developers agree to follow the requirements outlined in the present document.
Double claiming with NDCs shall be prevented by signed agreements with host countries and confirmation of corresponding adjustments. Such agreements will be made publicly available with the project documentation, and updated as needed.
Double claiming with national climate policies and emissions trading schemes shall be prevented by proof that the mitigation activity is outside the scope of such policies and schemes. If this is not the case, Project Developers must obtain proof of an accounting adjustment or cancellation in the emissions trading scheme.
Double claiming with other GHG-related environmental credit frameworks is not allowed. This is prevented by the signing of the Riverse MRV & Registry Terms & Conditions, where all Project Developers agree to follow the requirements outlined in the present document.
For purposes of voluntary climate pledges and reporting (e.g. GHG protocol), Project Developers must inform upstream and downstream supply chain entities of claimed project/intervention/insetting emission reductions, report them to Riverse, document any transfer of emission reduction units, and seek guidance in cases of conflicting claims from reporting bodies like the GHG Protocol.
📎 Supporting documents:
Signed Riverse MRV & Registry Terms & Conditions agreeing to follow the requirements outlined in the present document, including those related to double counting.
Proof that carbon credits will not be issued by specified actors within the same value chain for the same mitigation activity (specific proof requirements depending on the methodology).
[conditional] Any other requirements specified in the methodology document.
[conditional] Letters of authorization from host country and proof of corresponding adjustments.
Co-benefits
Projects shall support between two and four quantifiable and verifiable environmental or social co-benefits. These must be in addition to their climate benefits that are already accounted for in the issuance of RCCs.
Co-benefits must be positive environmental or social impacts that are substantial, and would not have occurred without the intervention of the project.
Project Developers shall use the SDGs outlined in the Appendix as the basis for identifying co-benefits, which are deemed most relevant to Riverse’s program focus.
Other relevant UN SDG sub-objectives or sustainability indicators may be suggested by Project Developers, and accepted at the discretion of the Riverse Certification team and the VVB.
Co-benefits shall be quantified and proven using the project’s GHG quantification results, primary data collection from the project, an LCA of the project or similar technology, or other reputable scientific documents. The tool, method, approach, and/or equations used for assessing co-benefits shall be described in methodology documents and/or DPDs.
📎 Supporting documents:
Identification of two to four UN SGDs that the project contributes to substantially as co-benefits, with:
quantified indicators for each co-benefit
source/proof for each co-benefit
Substitution
Projects shall prove that their project outputs have similar performance metrics to the baseline scenario and deliver equivalent functions.
Project Developers shall identify and quantify performance metrics to compare between the baseline and the project scenario. Specific metrics to consider are detailed in methodologies.
The GHG quantification method shall use an appropriate functional unit that reflects the equivalent functions delivered by the project and baseline scenarios (see more details in the GHG reduction quantification).
📎 Supporting documents:
Proof that the project output has sufficiently similar technical and performance specifications to substitute for the baseline scenario.
Environmental and Social Do No Harm Safeguards
Project Developers shall conduct a stakeholder consultation gathering feedback on the environmental and social impacts of their project, among other feedback. The stakeholder consultation shall take place during the project's validation process, addressed to local stakeholders and communities. The feedback is reviewed by the Riverse Certification team during the final project validation review, and they may require the Project Developer to take corrective action to address the concerns. The feedback shall be made publicly available in an appendix of the PDD. More details are included in the Riverse Procedures Manual.
If the project already has a legal permit (for example, construction permit, operation approval from authorities) that required similar stakeholder consultation or environmental and social impact assessments, Project Developers shall provide any documents related to those processes, and may be deemed exempt from the Riverse stakeholder consultation by the VVB and the Riverse Certification team.
Project Developers shall fill in the methodology’s Risk Assessment Template for their project type, evaluating the likelihood and severity of each environmental and social risk.
Certain methodologies may define strict rules and cutoffs that may disqualify projects based on their environmental and social risk assessment results.
If no methodology exists for the given project type, the requirement outlined at the end of the Permanence and risk of reversal section shall apply.
The Riverse Certification team or VVB may require annual monitoring of an environmental or social risk if they determine that the risk could lead to the project causing net harm.
Minimum ESDNH risks to assess
Risk assessments shall assess at least the following risks, which should be avoided and minimized:
Labor rights and working conditions
provide safe and healthy working conditions for employees
provide fair treatment of all employees, avoiding discrimination and ensuring equal opportunities
prohibit the use of forced labor, child labor, or trafficked persons, and protects contracted workers employed by third parties.
Resource efficiency and pollution prevention
minimize pollutant emissions to air
minimize pollutant discharges to water, noise and vibration
minimize generation of waste and release of hazardous materials, chemical pesticides and fertilizers
Land acquisition and involuntary resettlement
minimize forced physical and/or economic displacement
Biodiversity conservation and sustainable management of living natural resources
avoid and/or minimizes negative impacts on terrestrial and marine biodiversity and ecosystems
protect the habitats of rare, threatened, and endangered species, including areas needed for habitat connectivity
do not convert natural forests, grasslands, wetlands, or high conservation value habitats
minimize soil degradation and soil erosion
minimize water consumption and stress in the project
Indigenous Peoples (IPs), Local Communities (LCs), and cultural heritage
identify the rights-holders possibly affected by the mitigation activity (including customary rights of local rights holders);
when relevant, apply the FPIC process
do not force eviction or any physical or economic displacement of IPs & LCs, including through access restrictions to lands, territories, or resources, unless agreed upon with IPs & LCs during the FPIC process
preserve and protect cultural heritage consistent with IPs & LCs protocols/rules/plans on the management of cultural heritage or UNESCO Cultural Heritage conventions
Respect for human rights, stakeholder engagement
avoid discrimination and respect human rights
take into account and responds to local stakeholders’ views
Gender equality
provide for equal opportunities in the context of gender
protect against and appropriately responds to violence against women and girls
provide equal pay for equal work
📎 Supporting documents:
Results of the stakeholder consultation
[conditional] Legal permits, or results of previous stakeholder consultations or environmental and social impact studies
Project Developer’s responses to the Risk Assessment Template evaluating environmental and social risks
Leakage
Project Developers shall follow the relevant methodology requirements for identifying, assessing and mitigating leakage. Potential risks and detailed instructions are identified at the methodology level.
Methodologies provide instructions on how to assess leakage and manage and, if necessary, deduct leakage emissions. Any project-specific leakage risk may incur additional leakage emission deduction, up to the discretion of the Project Developer, the VVB and the Riverse Certification team.
If no methodology exists for the given project type, the requirement outlined at the end of the Permanence and risk of reversal section shall apply.
📎 Supporting documents:
Project Developer’s responses to the leakage risks identified in the methodology.
Technology Readiness Level
1
Basic principles observed
2
Technology concept formulated
3
Experimental proof of concept
4
Technology validated in lab
5
Technology validated in relevant environment
6
Technology demonstrated in relevant environment
7
System model or prototype demonstration in operational environment
8
System complete and qualified
9
Actual system proven in operational environment
Projects shall at minimum reach TRL 6, which is described in the table above.
📎 Supporting documents:
Proof of technological progress and/or production capacities either in an operational environment or lab.
Targets alignment
Projects’ reduction efficiency shall be higher than the targeted emission reduction targets for the project’s sector, presented in the :
Transport & mobility
17%
Construction & housing
73%
Agriculture
58%
Industry & waste
47%
Energy
45%
📎 Supporting documents:
GHG quantification results showing that the project’s GHG reduction efficiency is aligned with the sector target emission reductions.
Minimum impact
Projects shall justify a minimum emission reduction of 1000 tCOeq over the crediting period of the project.
To renew certification at the end of the crediting period, projects may re-conduct a complete validation process using the current Riverse Standard Rules and methodology requirements.
For renewed projects, the crediting period shall be the total length of the combined crediting periods.
📎 Supporting documents:
GHG quantification results showing that the project’s GHG emission reductions over the crediting period are projected to be at least 1000 tCOeq.
Last updated