Skip to main content
CarbonMeld CarbonMeld Carbon Observatory
Tools
EN
ScoredACRForest CarbonPENNSYLVANIA, USRegistry: RegisteredGeneral Methodologyv2.1

Hawk Mountain Forestry Project

Developer: The Nature Conservancy

ACR-375 ↗

#271of 481 in REDD+#967of 1661 in United States#507of 934 in American Carbon Registry (ACR)

Assessment

CarbonMeld document-based assessment

01020304 Overall 4.6 / 10 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%.

Analysis

The Hawk Mountain Forestry Project (ACR-375) is a Pennsylvania improved-forest-management project with VVB-confirmed additionality, a 19% buffer pool, and a 40% quantified leakage deduction, but the 2023 verification report identified 28 material findings including a critical error where the buffer deduction was set to zero in the ERT calculations instead of the required 15%, multiple carbon-pool misreporting issues, and a monitoring report that remained an unsigned draft. These quality-control failures significantly undermine confidence in the quantified emission reductions, even though the project's structural safeguards (buffer pool, leakage deduction, no reversal events) are in place.

Red Flags

4 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, 4 red flags, score factors, detailed analysis, and 14 registry documents (14 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)

    In scope, not yet eligible

    The registry flags units as in scope for CORSIA; eligibility still needs host-country authorization.

    Source: registry label

  • Integrity label (ICVCM CCP)

    CCP-labelled credits

    The registry marks these credits with the Core Carbon Principles label of the Integrity Council.

    Source: registry label

  • Removal or reduction

    Carbon removal

    Takes CO₂ out of the atmosphere — the only type that can neutralise residual emissions in an SBTi net-zero claim.

    Source: registry label

  • 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
2018
47,99647,9960
2019
82,86282,8620
2020
49,57746,8972,680
2021
34,4319,27925,152
2022
6,22306,223
Total221,089187,03434,055

Retired by

Organisations named as beneficiaries in the registry's public retirement records.

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].

Profile & governance

Analysis ProvenanceGeneral Methodologyv2.1

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 →