CarbonMeld CarbonMeld Carbon Observatory
Tools
ProjectsDevelopersComparePortfolioCCP trackerA–Z index BuyersCORSIA supplyCheck an offerAPI & MCP Method About the System Editorial Policy Score Your Project
EN
Workbench ProjectsDevelopersComparePortfolioCCP trackerA–Z index
← All projects
ScoredACRForest CarbonWISCONSIN, USRegistry: RegisteredGeneral Methodologyv2.1

Blue Source - Northwoods Improved Forest Management Project

Developer: Anew Carbon Development, LLC

ACR-373 ↗

Worked comparison example (English)

#66of 518 in REDD+#125of 1717 in United States#84of 957 in American Carbon Registry (ACR)

Assessment

CarbonMeld document-based assessment

01020304 Overall 6.2 / 10
Integrity 🔒 Transparency 🔒 Claim Safety 🔒 Documentation 🔒
Dimension scores are locked — the faint arcs are empty tracks, not zero scores.

Scale 0–10 · method weights: integrity 35% · transparency 25% · claim safety 25% · documentation 15%.

Scored2026-09-12high confidence

evidence:22/22registry documents analyzed · 3red flags

Generated by CarbonMeld Analysis Pipeline · Methodology · Editorial Policy · About the System
Download Report (PDF)

Analysis

The Northwoods Improved Forest Management project is a 25-year ACR forest carbon project in Wisconsin with a 17.6% buffer pool, no reported reversals, and a conservative 20% quantified leakage deduction. However, the project-specific baseline (mixed measured and modeled) lacks a documented reassessment date, and key safeguards elements (FPIC, grievance mechanism) are not explicitly documented in the extracted record. The ERR figures across two verification reports (31,037 vs 5,456) reflect different monitoring periods rather than a true discrepancy, but the absence of a lifetime ex-ante estimate limits the ability to assess over-crediting risk.

Red Flags

3 red flags detected — Unlock with Premium

Findings

Risk Indicators

Additionality

🔒

Permanence

🔒

Leakage

🔒

Baseline

🔒

Safeguards

🔒

Double-claim

🔒

Risk indicator details are a Premium feature

Score Breakdown

Score factors per dimension are a Premium feature — Unlock with Premium

Detailed Analysis

The detailed per-dimension analysis is a Premium feature — Unlock with Premium

Evidence

Unlock the full analysis

Per-dimension scores, risk indicators, 3 red flags, score factors, detailed analysis, and 22 registry documents (22 analyzed).

€9+ VAT · 30-day pass · one-time, no auto-renewal

Every rated project, PDF reports, API access, portfolio alerts and per-dimension scores with red-flag details in side-by-side comparisons for 30 days (public-data comparison is free; fair use: 30 projects per day).

Price + VAT · By paying you accept the Terms of Use — digital content, no refunds. How Premium works

Eligibility & market

What can you claim with this credit?

Four checks buyers ask about, from the registry and the Integrity Council (ICVCM).

  • Airlines (CORSIA)

    No CORSIA label on the registry

    Not usable for airlines' CORSIA obligations.

    Source: registry label

  • Integrity label (ICVCM CCP)

    No ICVCM information

    No CCP label and no ICVCM decision found for this project's methodology.

  • Removal or reduction

    Emission reduction or avoidance

    Prevents or reduces emissions — fits contribution claims, not SBTi neutralisation.

    Source: project sector

  • Paris Agreement (Article 6)

    No Article 6 authorization

    No corresponding adjustment: the host country can also count this reduction towards its own target.

    Source: registry label

Information only, from public sources. Claim rules (CORSIA, SBTi, EU rules on green claims) change: check them before making a public claim. Since 27 September 2026, EU consumer rules do not allow “climate neutral” product claims based on offsets.

Registry labels last checked:2026-09-27

Credit Vintages

IssuedRetiredAvailable
2017
394,86400
2018
34,03100
2019
45,90800
2020
24,20600
2021
5,45600
2022
37,33000
2023
12,34300
2024
31,037031,037
Total585,175031,037

Where to buy

Got an offer for these credits? Check it against the registry →

+ Know where to buy this?

Listing multiple projects? Send us a CSV at [email protected].

⚑ Dispute this rating

Profile & governance

Analysis ProvenanceGeneral Methodologyv2.1
Methodology·Editorial Policy·About the System

Are you the project owner?

Metadata correction (free)

Name, country, marketplace or links incorrect? Let us know.

Does not modify the score.

[email protected] →

Contest this rating

Something wrong in the analysis, or a registry document we have not used? Send us the link to the public source: you get a reference and an answer within 30 days.

Contest this rating →