New report: building a monitoring regime for trustworthy carbon credits

Once touted as a nimble tool for channelling climate finance into carbon-saving projects, voluntary carbon markets (VCMs) now face growing scepticism about their credibility and environmental integrity.  

But according to the Climate Crisis Advisory Group (CCAG) and Professor Mark Maslin of UCL, reform, not rejection, is the path forward.  

And for environmental monitoring professionals, especially those developing and deploying instrumentation, this is a call to action.

If you need to monitor sequestered carbon, head to our product directory to find hundreds of companies supplying environmental monitoring equipment.

The role and risks of VCMs

Each carbon credit sold in VCMs represents a tonne of CO₂ emissions avoided or removed. 

While the market is small compared to regulatory systems, it’s growing fast, currently channelling around $2 billion annually, with the potential to reach $10 billion within a decade.  

Yet high-profile failures, such as over-credited forest conservation projects, have triggered a crisis of confidence.  

These incidents expose weak verification systems, vague baselines, and inconsistent measurement.

As Maslin notes, “Scientific research shows that all the major approaches to creating carbon credits work—if done properly.” That "if" hinges on one thing: robust, transparent, and standardized monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV).

How do we know that CO2 concentrations are highest in more than 300,000 years?

As the latest data on carbon dioxide concentrations hits the headlines, it's a good time to dive into how we measure these concentrations - and why they matter. By Jed Thomas  High on th... Read More

Five fixes: what they mean for instrumentation

The CCAG outlines five core principles to fix the VCM system. Each has direct implications for the design, deployment, and governance of environmental monitoring technologies.

Radical transparency 

VCMs must end the opacity that shields poor practices.  

This includes transparent data on carbon capture performance, community impacts, and financial flows.  

For instrumentation developers, this means aligning sensors and platforms with open data standards and interoperability protocols.  

Satellite, drone, and in-situ sensor networks must feed into verifiable, accessible reporting systems.

Improved accreditation and verification 

Standardised MRV is central to reliable carbon credits.  

High-quality instrumentation,  be it for forest biomass estimation, methane capture, or soil carbon sequestration, needs to conform to evolving accreditation schemes.  

New verification regimes may require real-time telemetry, blockchain-anchored logs, or third-party calibrated baselines.

Human rights and co-benefits

Projects must follow the principle of "do no harm."  

Co-benefits such as improved biodiversity, water quality, and local livelihoods should be monitored alongside carbon metrics.  

Here, multi-sensor arrays and community-owned monitoring tools could be game-changers, capturing social and ecological indicators in tandem.

Prioritising high-integrity carbon removal 

The CCAG emphasizes that carbon credits should be used only after all other emissions-reduction strategies have been exhausted—and that credits should favour removal over avoidance.  

Technologies supporting biochar, direct air capture, and reforestation must be verifiable over long timescales.  

This raises the bar for long-term performance monitoring. Soil carbon sensors, spectroscopic analysis, and remote sensing will all play vital roles.

Stronger international regulation 

Without international oversight, VCMs remain vulnerable to manipulation.

Standardizing MRV technologies and methodologies across borders will be essential.

Environmental monitoring professionals can influence this space by engaging with emerging frameworks, such as ISO 14064, Verra, or the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market (ICVCM)—to ensure monitoring systems are fit for purpose globally.

Are we underreporting greenhouse gas emissions?

Although emissions of greenhouse gases continue to climb year on year, there is evidence to suggest we might not even be reporting all of them. Jed Thomas  Despite international commitments... Read More

The opportunity for monitoring professionals

The environmental instrumentation sector stands at a crossroads. On one hand, VCM failures highlight the costs of poor measurement.  

On the other, reform opens a market for high-quality, scientifically rigorous monitoring technologies.

VCMs won’t replace mandatory emissions cuts.  

But if implemented with transparency and accountability, they can fund climate action in vulnerable regions, incentivize nature-based solutions, and accelerate innovation in carbon removal.  

Accurate, affordable, and trustworthy monitoring is the linchpin.

As the CCAG report makes clear, VCMs must evolve beyond good intentions. For instrumentation professionals, the mission is clear: build the tools that prove what’s real.