King County Forest Carbon Offsets
#74of 389 in United States#32of 59 in City Forest Credits (CFC)
Audit Analysis
The King County urban forest preservation project demonstrates solid verification practices with a VVB-confirmed investment additionality test, a 10% buffer pool, and no material findings or corrective actions. However, the project-specific baseline, absence of a quantified leakage deduction figure, and multiple unstated safeguards and eligibility parameters create moderate uncertainty. The verified ERR of 3,025 is conservative relative to the PDD estimate of 3,361, reducing over-crediting risk.
Red Flags
- Leakage is described as 'quantified' in the verification report but no specific deduction percentage appears in the extracted record, leaving the magnitude of the adjustment unclear
- Safeguards documentation (FPIC, grievance mechanism, benefit sharing) is entirely absent from the available documents
- The 100-year permanence claim for urban tree preservation carries inherent risk from urban development pressure, and no reversal events data is available to confirm long-term stability
Credit Vintages
| Issued | Retired | Available | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 3,025 | 933 | 2,092 | |
| Total | 3,025 | 933 | 2,092 |
Risk Indicators
VVB-confirmed investment test
mixed evidence / unresolved risk
Quantified but pct not in record
Project-specific, reassessment date unstated
FPIC, grievance, benefit sharing all unstated
CORSIA and CCP status both unstated
⚑ Dispute this rating
Are you the project owner?
Metadata correction (free)
Name, country, marketplace or links incorrect? Let us know.
Does not modify the score.
[email protected] →Pipeline re-run with new documents
Have updated documentation not yet included? You can request a new run of the pipeline with the new inputs.
Submit Documents →Share this rating
