The science that
makes every credit
unimpeachable
Teravent's credibility rests entirely on science. Our independent Advisory Board, peer-reviewed methodologies, and continuous MRV systems ensure that every carbon credit we issue represents genuine, measurable, permanent removal - with nothing hidden and nothing assumed.
Peer-reviewed foundations only
Every removal mechanism we credit must be established in the published scientific literature and accepted by the broader climate science community.
Independent verification always
No credit is issued based on developer self-reporting. All quantification and monitoring claims are validated by accredited third-party verifiers.
Uncertainty is disclosed, not hidden
Where measurement uncertainty exists, it is quantified, published, and applied conservatively to credit issuance. We do not pretend certainty we don't have.
Standards evolve with science
Our methodologies are updated as the science advances. Credits are re-evaluated when significant new evidence emerges - including downward revision if required.
"We built Teravent's science framework on one uncompromising principle: a carbon credit is only worth issuing if we would stake our reputations on the science behind it. Every methodology, every measurement protocol, every verification requirement exists because the evidence demands it - not because it is convenient."Dr. Sunley Lissy George - Chair, Teravent Science Advisory Board · SYNE Institute / The University of Sydney
World-class experts.
Zero conflicts of interest.
The Teravent Science Advisory Board comprises 12 independent scientists from leading global institutions. Board members are appointed for two-year renewable terms and are prohibited from holding financial interests in any Teravent -registered project during their tenure. All Board decisions on methodology approval are published in full.
The University of Sydney
Dr. Sunley leads the SYNE Institute's Climate Research and has contributed to climate science and assessment reports. Her work focuses on climate change, food and water security, ocean economy, land-use emissions, and equity dimensions of carbon markets in Global South.
Blue Carbon Centre of Excellence, Principal Scientist
Dr. Rahimah is the foremost authority on tropical peatland and mangrove carbon accounting in Southeast Asia. She developed the biomass allometric equations used in Indonesian national forest inventories and has published over 80 peer-reviewed papers on blue carbon science.
International Biochar Initiative, Technical Committee Chair
Dr. Mendes has spent 20 years studying soil organic carbon dynamics in tropical agricultural systems across Latin America. He chairs the International Biochar Initiative's technical standards committee and developed widely-adopted biochar MRV protocols.
Dept. of Geological Sciences, Associate Professor
Professor Khumalo is Africa's leading expert on enhanced rock weathering as a carbon dioxide removal pathway. Her field trials across South African and East African agricultural soils have provided foundational data for weathering rate models used globally.
Terrestrial Carbon Science Programme Lead
Dr. Lima is a tropical forest ecologist specialising in biomass estimation and remote sensing-based forest carbon monitoring. She leads the Amazon carbon monitoring programme and serves on the technical advisory panel for Brazil's national REDD+ strategy.
Indian Ocean Carbon Programme Director
Professor Otieno's research focuses on ocean alkalinity enhancement, seagrass carbon flux, and coral reef biogeochemistry in the Western Indian Ocean. He leads a multi-institution programme monitoring blue carbon stocks across East Africa's coast.
How science governs
every decision
From methodology submission to credit issuance, science drives every step of the Teravent process. No methodology is accepted, and no credit is issued, without satisfying all criteria at each gate.
Methodology Submission
Any project developer or research institution may submit a proposed methodology. Submissions must include full scientific references, uncertainty analysis, and a proposed MRV protocol. The Board secretariat screens for completeness within 14 days.
Expert Panel Review
A minimum of three Science Advisory Board members with relevant expertise review the submission against our five acceptance criteria: peer-reviewed basis, measurability, permanence, additionality, and ecosystem safety. A formal written assessment is produced.
Public Consultation
Draft methodologies are published openly for a 30-day public comment period. Submissions from scientists, indigenous communities, NGOs, and industry are reviewed and formally responded to. The Board may request revisions based on consultation feedback.
Formal Approval & Publication
The Board votes by simple majority. Approved methodologies are assigned a Teravent Method ID and published in full - including all scientific references, uncertainty bounds, MRV requirements, and any dissenting Board opinions.
Project Application
Developers apply approved methodologies to their projects. Applications must demonstrate how their specific context satisfies all methodology requirements, including baseline establishment, additionality demonstration, and monitoring plan design.
Third-Party Verification
All verification is conducted by accredited, independent verifiers approved by the Board. Verifiers must have no commercial relationship with the project developer. Verification reports are published in full on the Teravent registry.
Credit Issuance
Credits are issued only after positive verification. Each credit receives a unique serial number, is recorded in the public ledger, and is linked to the full verification report and underlying project data. Conservative discounting for uncertainty is applied.
Continuous Review
Methodologies are reviewed at minimum every three years against advances in the science. If significant new evidence emerges, the Board may initiate an emergency review. Credits already issued are protected unless fraud or gross misrepresentation is found.
MRV that leaves
nothing to chance
Teravent's MRV framework is built on the principle that what cannot be measured cannot be credited. We require continuous monitoring, multi-layer data validation, and fully independent verification for every registered project.
Our approach integrates satellite remote sensing with ground-truth field measurements and independent laboratory analysis - creating a multi-source verification stack that is robust to any single point of failure.
Measurement
Quantification of carbon stocks and fluxes using approved, standardised protocols with declared uncertainty bounds. All measurement methods must be reproducible and independently auditable.
Reporting
Annual monitoring reports submitted to Teravent using standardised templates. All raw data, processing scripts, and model outputs must be submitted alongside summary reports for independent review.
Verification
Independent third-party audit conducted by Board-approved verifiers on a minimum 3-year cycle, with annual desk-review in intervening years. Site visits are mandatory at first verification.
Uncertainty Accounting
Measurement uncertainty is quantified at each step using Tier 1–3 IPCC approaches. Conservative discounting applies: credits are issued only for the lower bound of uncertainty ranges.
Multi-Layer Data Stack
All registered projects must provide data from at least three independent monitoring layers
Science we stand
behind - publicly
Teravent publishes all approved methodologies, methodology review decisions, and our own commissioned research openly. Where our Science Board members publish work relevant to carbon removal, we link it here. Science should be transparent - including ours.
Our commitments
to honest science
Science under commercial pressure is vulnerable to capture. We have built structural safeguards at every level to ensure that Teravent's scientific judgements remain independent, honest, and in the service of the climate - not the market.
Board Independence & Conflict of Interest Policy
All Board members serve in a personal scientific capacity, not as institutional representatives. Before each methodology vote, members must disclose any relevant financial or research interests. Members with conflicts recuse themselves.
- No Board member may hold equity in, consult for, or receive research funding from any Teravent-registered project during their tenure
- Conflict disclosures are published alongside Board decisions
- Board Chair cannot vote on methodologies where their institution has published primary research
- Two-year tenure limit prevents institutional capture; staggered appointments maintain continuity
Radical Transparency in All Decisions
Every Board decision is published in full - including the vote, individual member statements, dissenting opinions, and the full scientific rationale. There are no private decisions and no confidential methodology reviews.
- Full meeting minutes published within 30 days of each Board session
- All submitted methodology documents published regardless of acceptance outcome
- Declined methodology decisions include full written scientific rationale
- Public comment period responses addressed individually and published
Conservative Crediting as Scientific Default
Where uncertainty exists in measurement or modelling, Teravent defaults to the conservative estimate. We would rather issue fewer credits than over-claim. This is not a commercial decision - it is a scientific one.
- Credits issued at lower bound of uncertainty ranges as standard practice
- Buffer pools sized using worst-case permanence risk scenarios
- No credit is issued for projected removals - only verified historical removals
- Leakage deductions applied even when evidence is ambiguous
Living Standards & Retrospective Review
Science advances. Our standards advance with it. We are committed to updating methodologies as evidence evolves and to communicating transparently when existing credits may need re-evaluation.
- All methodologies reviewed on a 3-year cycle against new published science
- Emergency review triggered by significant new evidence or IPCC updates
- Projects notified 12 months in advance of methodology changes with transition support
- Historical credits protected unless fraud, gross error, or fundamentally changed science
Active science
at the frontier
The Board operates through seven specialist Working Groups, each focused on developing, reviewing, or advancing science in a specific area of carbon removal. Working Groups are open to external scientists who contribute on an advisory basis.
WG-1: Marine & Blue Carbon
Developing and reviewing methodologies for all marine carbon pathways including mangroves, seagrass, saltmarsh, ocean alkalinity, and macro-algae. Currently finalising TM-004 for seagrass MRV.
WG-2: Forest & Land Carbon
Overseeing ARR, REDD+, peatland, agroforestry, and soil carbon methodologies. Currently updating TM-003 peatland methodology following new IPCC guidance on tropical peat emission factors.
WG-3: Biochar & BioCRS
Biochar production quantification, soil application permanence, and BioCRS pathway review including BECCS and wood vault approaches. Reviewing new H:C ratio stability evidence.
WG-4: Geochemical Pathways
Enhanced weathering, mine tailings mineralisation, and in-situ carbonation. Currently peer-reviewing three new field trial datasets on tropical weathering rates submitted for methodology revision.
WG-5: MRV & Remote Sensing
Cross-cutting group developing monitoring technology standards, satellite data processing protocols, and guidance on integrating new sensors including GEDI LiDAR and future hyperspectral instruments.
WG-6: Engineered & Frontier CDR
New working group forming to assess DAC, BECCS, and other engineered carbon dioxide removal pathways. Currently recruiting specialist members; first meeting planned for Q2 2026.
Science is stronger
when we do it together
Teravent's scientific credibility grows with the breadth and depth of the expertise we can bring to bear. We actively welcome collaboration from researchers, institutions, and verifiers who share our commitment to rigorous, transparent carbon removal science.