Where the undertaking has implemented GHG removal and storage projects in its own operations or contributed to them in its value chain, it describes the projects, the removals and storage per project (using consensus accounting methods such as the Union carbon removal certification framework, including only removals not sold as credits and not double counted, and accounting the related emissions under E1-8), how non-permanence, leakage and reversal risk is managed, and any reversals in tCO2e deducted from the stored amount. For projects outside its operations and value chain financed through carbon credits it discloses the credits verified against recognised quality standards and cancelled in the period, the credits purchased and not yet cancelled, and the share from removal projects split between nature-based and technological sinks, without counting credits from projects within its own operations or value chain and with future cancellations calculated over existing contracts. Where it makes GHG neutrality claims involving credits it explains whether and how the claims and the reliance on credits neither hinder nor undermine its reduction targets, and the credibility and integrity of the credits by reference to recognised standards.
This control maps to 1 controls across 1 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.
The graph holds this control, the 1 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.