VeraCarbon uses AI-powered multi-index satellite analysis to independently verify carbon offset claims before purchase — producing a seven-pillar Carbon Credit Integrity Score (CCIS) for any ecosystem — with a focus on MENA and Sub-Saharan Africa where carbon market integrity is most critical.
7
Scoring pillars
10m
Satellite resolution
CCIS
Integrity score
Any
Ecosystem type
Live Analysis · Abu Dhabi Mangroves
NDVI Baseline (2020)0.160
NDVI Verified (2024)0.151
Net vegetation change−0.009
CCIS Score61 / 100
VerdictNeeds Review
The Problem
Carbon markets run on trust. VeraCarbon provides evidence.
90%
of Verra's REDD+ rainforest offset credits — the world's most widely purchased — were found to be largely worthless by independent researchers in 2023. Companies spent billions on credits representing no real carbon reduction. VeraCarbon exists to verify before companies buy.
01
Phantom Credits
Projects claim sequestration from ecosystems satellite data shows have not meaningfully changed. No vegetation growth, no carbon stored — but credits are issued anyway.
02
Conflicted Auditors
Third-party verifiers are paid by the projects they review. No truly independent, data-driven verification system exists — until now.
03
Impermanence Risk
Forests certified today may be degraded within years. Most credits have no ongoing satellite monitoring to detect this.
04
No Ground Truth
No existing tool cross-references credit claims with time-series satellite imagery at exact project coordinates. VeraCarbon fills this gap.
Protecting the ecosystems that protect us.
VeraCarbon uses satellite intelligence to ensure carbon protection is real, measurable, and permanent — before a single dollar is spent.
How It Works
From satellite to verdict.
A reproducible four-step pipeline using ESA Sentinel-2 optical and Sentinel-1 SAR radar via Google Earth Engine, producing a seven-pillar Carbon Credit Integrity Score — applicable to any ecosystem globally.
1
Submit Claim
Project coordinates, ecosystem type, registry, and date range submitted before purchase. Any ecosystem, any country.
PROJECT METADATA
2
Pull Imagery
Google Earth Engine retrieves cloud-filtered Sentinel-2 optical and Sentinel-1 SAR imagery at 10m resolution for the exact project zone.
GEE · S2 + S1 SAR
3
7-Pillar Analysis
NDVI · EVI · GNDVI · SAR permanence · Additionality control zone · Leakage buffer zone · Baseline integrity — all computed.
CCIS · 7 PILLARS
4
Score & Report
A 0–100 Carbon Credit Integrity Score with confidence rating, clear recommendation, and downloadable PDF report.
CCIS REPORT
Verify before you buy.
Submit a carbon credit for independent seven-pillar satellite analysis — or explore the science behind our methodology.
Scientific Methodology
The Carbon Credit Integrity Score (CCIS)
A seven-pillar, satellite-based verification framework grounded in peer-reviewed remote sensing research and aligned with global carbon market integrity standards. Applies to any ecosystem — forests, grasslands, wetlands, coastal systems, croplands — anywhere in the world.
Data Sources
ESA Sentinel-2 MSI optical (10m) · ESA Sentinel-1 C-band SAR (10m) · Google Earth Engine · ERA5 climate reanalysis · Sentinel-2 archive from 2015
Each pillar is independently scored 0–100 and combined into the final CCIS using the weights shown. Together they address the four core carbon market failures: additionality, permanence, leakage, and baseline integrity — plus vegetation evidence, co-benefits, and data quality.
01
Vegetation Change Detection
Did biomass actually increase? Is there measurable vegetation growth?
25% weightNDVI · EVI · GNDVI▼
The primary question in any carbon credit verification: did vegetation biomass actually change during the claimed period? VeraCarbon computes three complementary vegetation indices from Sentinel-2 MSI imagery. Using three indices prevents false positives — in dense ecosystems NDVI saturates and loses sensitivity to further biomass growth, so EVI and GNDVI are essential cross-checks.
NDVI
Normalized Difference Vegetation Index. The foundational measure of green vegetation density. Effective for sparse to moderately dense ecosystems. Formula: (NIR − Red) / (NIR + Red). Values 0.2–0.5 indicate healthy vegetation.
EVI
Enhanced Vegetation Index. Reduces atmospheric and soil noise. Critical for dense forests where NDVI saturates. Adds blue band correction for aerosol influence. Formula: 2.5 × (NIR − Red) / (NIR + 6×Red − 7.5×Blue + 1).
GNDVI
Green NDVI. Replaces the red band with green, making it more sensitive to chlorophyll and photosynthetic biomass. Shown to correlate more strongly with above-ground carbon stock than NDVI alone.
Scientific Basis
Satellite-derived vegetation indices correlate strongly with above-ground carbon levels (R² = 0.84), demonstrated in a 2025 PLOS One study tracking Alemsaga forest, Ethiopia over 30 years. EVI's superiority over NDVI in high-biomass regions is confirmed by Matsushita et al. (2007, Sensors): "The gain factor makes EVI more effective in high biomass regions where NDVI saturates." A 2025 Springer Nature study evaluating 12 vegetation indices found NDVI, NDRE, EVI, and GNDVI collectively contributed over 80% of predictive power in a validated biomass model (R² = 0.97, RMSE = 1.57 t C/ha).
How VeraCarbon measures this
1
Pull cloud-filtered Sentinel-2 imagery for the project zone in baseline and verification year
2
Compute NDVI, EVI, and GNDVI composites (median of all available scenes) for both periods
3
Calculate net change for each index; weight and combine into a Vegetation Change Score (0–100)
4
A change of ≥0.05 NDVI units is scientifically significant; changes below this threshold score lower
02
Additionality Assessment
Is the project zone outperforming comparable unprotected areas?
20% weightControl Zone · DiD Analysis▼
Additionality is the most exploited weakness in carbon markets. A project claims credit for carbon that would have been stored anyway — without any intervention. VeraCarbon detects non-additional credits by comparing the project zone to a matched control zone: a nearby ecologically similar area that received no intervention. If both zones show equal improvement, the project contributed nothing climatically meaningful.
Control Zone Matching
A control zone is selected adjacent to the project with matching ecosystem type, elevation, and historical NDVI. The project's trend is compared to this counterfactual — what would have happened without the project.
Difference-in-Difference
DiD compares the change in the project zone (before vs after) to the change in the control zone (before vs after). If the difference is statistically insignificant, additionality is not demonstrated.
Pre-Project Trend
Using the Sentinel-2 archive from 2015, VeraCarbon examines the pre-project vegetation trajectory. If the ecosystem was already recovering before the project started, the claimed carbon impact is questionable.
Scientific Basis
The Cambridge Centre for Carbon Credits (4C) measures additionality using DiD analysis with pixel-matched control groups from historical satellite data. A landmark 2020 study in PNAS (West et al.) found that across voluntary REDD+ projects in the Brazilian Amazon, nearly 40% of tradable carbon offsets were not genuinely additional — the forest would not have been deforested without the project. A 2024 Nature Communications study found 87% of carbon offsets used by 20 major companies were at "high risk of not providing real emissions reductions."
How VeraCarbon measures this
1
Identify a matched control zone within 10km with equivalent ecosystem type and pre-project NDVI
2
Compute NDVI trend for both zones across the full analysis period
3
If project zone improvement minus control zone improvement is less than 0.03 NDVI, additionality score is reduced
4
Examine pre-project trend: if ecosystem was already recovering, score is further reduced
03
Permanence Risk Assessment
Will the carbon stay stored? Is the ecosystem stable long-term?
20% weightSAR · Climate Stress · Fire Risk▼
A carbon credit may represent storage promised for 20 to 100 years. Permanence risk asks whether the ecosystem can honour that commitment. VeraCarbon uses Sentinel-1 SAR radar — which penetrates cloud cover and forest canopy to measure actual biomass structure — alongside ERA5 climate anomaly records to evaluate fire exposure, drought stress, and temperature extremes. This is the pillar that single-point-in-time audits consistently fail to assess.
Sentinel-1 SAR
C-band synthetic aperture radar penetrates clouds and tree canopy to measure vertical biomass structure. Detects structural loss from storms, disease, or illegal logging that optical sensors cannot see. 6-day revisit enables continuous monitoring.
Climate Stress Index
ERA5 reanalysis temperature anomalies and NDWI drought index identify heat stress, drought, and water deficit — all of which increase reversal risk in nature-based carbon projects.
Fire & Disturbance
Time-series SAR backscatter detects sudden biomass loss events consistent with fire, logging, or storm damage. Any confirmed disturbance event within the monitoring period triggers an automatic permanence score penalty.
Scientific Basis
A NASA review of carbon monitoring confirms SAR is "particularly useful in tropical peatlands due to cloud and canopy penetration and its sensitivity to biomass." Research in Scientific Reports (Nature, 2020) demonstrated that combining Sentinel-1 SAR with optical data significantly outperforms optical-only approaches for above-ground biomass estimation. A 2023 ScienceDirect study confirms: "SAR images can be used for forest AGB estimation as their signals can penetrate clouds and fog." Sentinel-1's 6-day revisit cycle enables the continuous permanence monitoring impossible with traditional annual audits (MDPI Forests, 2023).
How VeraCarbon measures this
1
Pull Sentinel-1 SAR backscatter time series for the project zone across the full analysis period
2
Identify sudden drops in SAR backscatter consistent with biomass loss events
3
Overlay ERA5 temperature anomalies and NDWI drought index to quantify climate stress exposure
4
Score proportional to stability: low stress + no disturbance = high permanence score
04
Leakage Detection
Is deforestation increasing in the 5km buffer zone around the project?
15% weight5km Buffer · NDVI Trend · Displacement▼
Leakage occurs when protecting one area simply displaces harmful activity to a neighbouring area. A project may show a healthy NDVI inside its boundary while deforestation accelerates just outside — displacing rather than preventing emissions. VeraCarbon monitors a 5km buffer zone around every project, flagging any vegetation loss that correlates in time with the project start date.
Buffer Zone NDVI
NDVI is computed for a 5km ring around the project boundary. A declining trend in this buffer zone that begins after project start is a strong indicator of deforestation displacement — local leakage.
Temporal Correlation
Leakage is distinguished from background deforestation by timing: if buffer zone decline begins at or after the project start date, it is likely caused by the project's exclusion of activity from the protected area.
Spatial Pattern Analysis
SAR and optical indices map the pattern of vegetation change inside and outside the project boundary, identifying whether loss is occurring adjacent to project edges — the primary leakage signature.
Scientific Basis
The Cambridge Centre for Carbon Credits (4C) defines the standard leakage detection protocol: "We create a buffer zone around the project area, normally around 5km radius, in which we also monitor deforestation using satellites." A 2020 study in PNAS (West et al.) found leakage evidence in three of six REDD+ projects in the Brazilian Amazon by analysing "shifts in deforestation after project start in 10km buffer zones." A 2025 Land (MDPI) study demonstrated that deforestation spillovers from reforestation projects peak two years after project onset — validating time-series satellite monitoring as the correct detection method.
How VeraCarbon measures this
1
Define a 5km buffer ring around the project boundary coordinates
2
Compute NDVI trend in the buffer zone before and after project start
3
If buffer zone NDVI declines after project start while project zone improves, leakage is flagged
4
Leakage magnitude estimated from ratio of buffer zone loss to project zone gain
05
Baseline Integrity
Was the claimed baseline realistic, or was deforestation risk inflated?
10% weightHistorical Archive · Pre-Project Trend▼
The baseline is the emissions level that would have occurred without the project. Inflating the baseline — by assuming a forest never at risk would have been completely destroyed — is one of the most common forms of carbon credit fraud. VeraCarbon accesses the Sentinel-2 archive from 2015 to reconstruct the actual pre-project vegetation trend and assess whether the claimed baseline was realistic or artificially pessimistic.
Scientific Basis
RMI (2026) confirms satellites now enable baselines to be updated based on actual ground conditions — "replacing assumptions with evidence." Sylvera's methodology explicitly flags projects where baseline calculations use "non-conservative, unjustified parameter values" as a primary over-crediting risk. A 2024 Nature Communications study found that many project areas had pre-existing low deforestation rates — meaning the claimed baseline threat was exaggerated. The EU's 2040 climate strategy calls for satellite-verified baselines as a condition of credit eligibility.
How VeraCarbon measures this
1
Access Sentinel-2 archive for the project zone from 2015 to project start date
2
Compute multi-year pre-project NDVI trend: was vegetation stable, improving, or declining?
3
Compare historical deforestation rate to regional reference — was this area genuinely at risk?
4
If pre-project ecosystem was stable, baseline integrity score is reduced proportionally
06
Co-Benefits Proxy
Does the project support biodiversity, or is it an ecological monoculture?
5% weightEVI Variance · Habitat Heterogeneity▼
High-integrity carbon credits deliver benefits beyond carbon — biodiversity, water regulation, and community wellbeing. VeraCarbon uses EVI spatial variance as a proxy for habitat heterogeneity. Structurally diverse, ecologically healthy ecosystems produce highly variable EVI signals across a zone. Low variance often indicates monoculture plantation: ecologically poor, structurally fragile, and at elevated collapse risk — even when headline NDVI looks healthy. Sylvera, BeZero, and Calyx all include co-benefit scoring in their rating frameworks.
Scientific Basis
Sylvera's carbon credit rating framework explicitly includes co-benefit scoring related to biodiversity alongside carbon metrics. The ICVCM's Core Carbon Principles (2023) require that high-integrity credits demonstrate sustainable development co-benefits and do not cause net harm to biodiversity. EVI's sensitivity to canopy structure and chlorophyll makes it a suitable proxy for ecosystem complexity — spatial variance in vegetation indices correlates with species richness and habitat heterogeneity at ecosystem scale.
07
Data Confidence
How many scenes were analyzed? How reliable is the satellite record?
5% weightScene Count · Cloud Cover · Resolution▼
Every CCIS score is accompanied by a data confidence rating. A score derived from 30 cloud-free Sentinel-2 scenes carries significantly more evidentiary weight than one derived from 5 partially-clouded scenes. VeraCarbon reports the number of scenes analyzed, average cloud cover, and spatial resolution — providing full transparency into the evidentiary basis of every verdict. This operationalises the ICVCM's requirement for transparent, conservative carbon accounting at the verification level.
Scientific Basis
Sylvera's methodology notes that insufficient data — particularly missing shapefiles and limited monitoring records — "makes it impossible to fully evaluate the integrity of a project." Sentinel-2's 5-day revisit cycle and Sentinel-1's 6-day revisit cycle provide the temporal density required for reliable time-series analysis. The ICVCM Core Carbon Principles require carbon accounting to be transparent and conservative — VeraCarbon's confidence reporting operationalises this at the verification level.
Score Thresholds
What each CCIS verdict means.
75 – 100
Verified
Satellite data strongly supports the credit claim across all seven pillars. Vegetation change is significant, additionality is demonstrated, permanence risk is low, no leakage detected. VeraCarbon recommends purchase subject to standard due diligence.
50 – 74
Needs Review
Satellite data partially supports the claim but one or more pillars raise concerns. Independent field verification is recommended before purchase. Specific pillar concerns are identified in the full report.
0 – 49
Flagged
Satellite data does not support the credit claim. Significant concerns across multiple pillars — possible phantom credits, leakage, or inflated baselines. VeraCarbon recommends rejecting this credit before any purchase.
Limitations & Transparency
VeraCarbon is a satellite-based pre-purchase screening tool, not a replacement for full third-party verification or legal certification. Our CCIS reflects evidence available from publicly accessible satellite imagery and climate data. Factors outside the satellite record — community consent, land tenure, governance quality, and socioeconomic context — are not captured in this score. For credits above a material financial threshold, we recommend supplementing our score with a full rating from Sylvera, BeZero, or Calyx Global. VeraCarbon scores are not financial advice and do not constitute a legal audit.
Carbon Fraud Database
The dangers of unverified carbon credits.
Real, documented cases where carbon credits failed to represent genuine climate impact. This is why independent satellite verification before purchase matters.
CRITICAL2023
Verra REDD+ Rainforest Credits — Mass Invalidation
An investigation by The Guardian, Zeit, and SourceMaterial found that more than 90% of Verra's rainforest offset credits were "phantom credits" representing no real carbon reduction. Forests certified as "protected" were either not at risk, or continued to be logged. Companies including Disney, Shell, and Gucci purchased these credits to offset millions of tonnes of CO2.
Estimated fraudulent credits: 94 million tonnes CO2
CRITICAL2023
South Pole / Kariba REDD+ Project, Zimbabwe
South Pole sold credits from the Kariba forest project for over a decade. Internal documents revealed significant over-crediting — far more credits than actual carbon sequestered. Multiple major corporations used Kariba credits to make "net zero" claims.
Over-credited by an estimated 30+ million tonnes CO2
HIGH RISK2022
Australia's Carbon Credit Scandal
Australia's Clean Energy Regulator issued hundreds of millions in carbon credits for projects delivering little or no climate benefit. A government review found credits for trees never at risk, vegetation that regrows naturally, and methodologies that grossly overestimated sequestration. The scandal prompted calls for mandatory satellite monitoring.
AUD 2.5B+ in questionable credits issued
HIGH RISK2021
California Forest Carbon Offsets — Buffer Pool Failure
CarbonPlan found California's forest carbon program issued 30+ million tonnes of overestimated credits, relying on averages that didn't account for climate change. When wildfires destroyed credited forests, the permanence buffer pool was found severely underfunded — proving point-in-time audits cannot detect long-term risk.
30M+ tonnes of overestimated credits issued
SYSTEMICOngoing
Global Blue Carbon Permanence Risk
Mangrove, seagrass, and saltmarsh ecosystems globally are increasingly being credited as blue carbon sinks. Independent satellite analysis shows significant variability in ecosystem health over time. Temperature stress, coastal development, and sea-level rise create permanence risks that standard point-in-time audits cannot detect.
Estimated $1B+ in blue carbon credits at permanence risk globally
Why VeraCarbon exists
Every case above shares a common thread: credits were issued based on ground surveys, self-reported data, or single-point-in-time audits — without independent, ongoing satellite verification. VeraCarbon's seven-pillar CCIS provides the objective, reproducible ground truth the carbon market currently lacks. Verify before you buy.
Satellite Analysis Engine
NDVI Analysis Tool
Enter project coordinates to run a multi-index satellite analysis and generate a seven-pillar CCIS using ESA Sentinel-2 and Sentinel-1 SAR imagery.
VERACARBON · CCIS ENGINE v2.0 · SENTINEL-2 SR + SENTINEL-1 SAR · 7-PILLAR ANALYSIS
Ready
Latitude
Longitude
Ecosystem type
Start year
End year
Enter project coordinates and run analysis to see the 7-pillar CCIS score.
This tool runs on real ESA satellite data.
Click below to open the live VeraCarbon CCIS Engine — enter any project coordinates and get a real 7-pillar score powered by 900+ Sentinel-2 scenes.
ESA Sentinel-2 SR + Sentinel-1 SAR · Google Earth Engine · CCIS 7-pillar methodologyOpen in Earth Engine ↗
Credit Verification
Submit a Carbon Credit
Submit your credit claim for independent satellite CCIS verification before purchase. Seven-pillar analysis using ESA Sentinel-2 and Sentinel-1 SAR — any ecosystem, globally.
VeraCarbon
1
Project
2
Location
3
Claim
4
Review
Project information
Tell us about the carbon offset project you want to verify before purchasing.
Step 1 of 4
Project location
Enter exact coordinates. Used to pull real satellite imagery via Google Earth Engine. Any ecosystem, any country.
Credit claim details
Specify what the project claims to have achieved. This defines the seven-pillar CCIS analysis parameters.
Vegetation restoration or growth
New or expanded vegetation measurable by NDVI, EVI, and GNDVI — Pillar 1
Deforestation prevention (REDD+)
Avoided loss verified by additionality control zone and leakage buffer — Pillars 2 & 4
Blue carbon storage (coastal ecosystems)
Mangrove, seagrass, or saltmarsh sequestration with SAR permanence monitoring — Pillar 3
Review & submit
Confirm your details before VeraCarbon runs the seven-pillar satellite analysis.
Project
Company—
Registry—
Credit ID—
Credits claimed—
Location & Analysis Parameters
Coordinates—
Country—
Ecosystem—
Analysis period—
Scoring modelCCIS · 7-pillar · ESA Sentinel-2 + Sentinel-1 SAR
⚠ By submitting, you confirm coordinates and claim details are accurate. VeraCarbon's CCIS is a satellite-based pre-purchase screening tool and does not constitute legal certification or financial advice.
Upload Project Document AI-Powered
Upload the project's methodology or monitoring report. Claude AI will extract all claims and cross-reference them against satellite evidence to detect fraud.
📄
Drop PDF here or click to upload
Project Description, Monitoring Report, or Methodology Document
No document uploaded
Optional — you can skip this step and run satellite analysis only. AI document analysis adds fraud detection against developer claims.
Analysis Complete
Carbon Credit Integrity Score (CCIS)
Seven-pillar satellite analysis complete. Results based on ESA Sentinel-2 optical and Sentinel-1 SAR imagery via Google Earth Engine.
Claude AI · Cross-referenced against satellite data
Fraud Probability
—
Risk Classification
—
AI Audit Summary
—
Specific Discrepancies Found
—
About VeraCarbon
Built to fix a broken market.
VeraCarbon is an independent satellite-based carbon credit verification platform. We exist because the voluntary carbon market has a fraud problem — and the solution is data, not trust.
The Mission
Verify before you buy.
In 2023, independent researchers found that over 90% of the world's most widely purchased carbon credits were effectively worthless — representing no real carbon reduction. Companies including Shell, Disney, and Gucci had spent billions on credits that did nothing for the climate.
The problem is structural. Carbon credits are verified by auditors paid by the projects they review. Verification happens once, at a single point in time. No one is watching what happens to the ecosystem after the credit is issued.
VeraCarbon was built to change this. Using ESA Sentinel-2 optical imagery and Sentinel-1 SAR radar data processed via Google Earth Engine, we provide independent, satellite-based verification of any carbon credit claim — before purchase, for any ecosystem, anywhere in the world.
Focus Region
MENA & Sub-Saharan Africa
The Middle East, North Africa, and Sub-Saharan Africa represent some of the fastest-growing carbon credit markets globally — and some of the least independently verified. VeraCarbon prioritises these regions where the verification gap is largest.
Who We Serve
Buyers, Developers & Investors
Carbon market buyers who need assurance before purchasing. Project developers who want to demonstrate credibility. Institutional investors building ESG portfolios who cannot afford to hold fraudulent credits.
The Technology
Real Satellite Data. Real Scores.
ESA Sentinel-2 MSI (10m optical) + Sentinel-1 C-band SAR (10m radar) + Google Earth Engine + ERA5 climate reanalysis. Every CCIS score is backed by hundreds of real satellite observations.
The Framework
Why seven pillars?
Carbon credit fraud doesn't fail on one dimension — it fails on many simultaneously. A credit can show vegetation growth but have no additionality. It can be additional but leak into surrounding areas. The CCIS was designed to catch fraud at every layer.
25%
Vegetation Change
NDVI + EVI + GNDVI
20%
Additionality
Control zone DiD
20%
Permanence Risk
SAR + climate stress
15%
Leakage Detection
5km buffer zone
Alignment
Built on industry standards.
ICVCM Core Carbon Principles
VeraCarbon's CCIS is designed to operationalise the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market's requirements for transparent, additional, and permanent carbon credits.
Cambridge 4C Leakage Protocol
Our Pillar 4 leakage detection uses the exact 5km buffer zone methodology defined by the Cambridge Centre for Carbon Credits.
Verra VM0047 MRV Standards
Consistent with Verra's Methodology for Afforestation, Reforestation and Revegetation monitoring, reporting, and verification standards.
Real Satellite Analyses
Case Studies
Real CCIS analyses run on real satellite data. These are not simulations — every number below comes from actual ESA Sentinel-2 imagery processed via Google Earth Engine.
938 Sentinel-2 + SAR scenes 12.8% avg cloud cover Buffer NDVI change: −0.0214 Data confidence: High (95%)
VERACARBON FINDING
Real satellite data shows Abu Dhabi mangrove NDVI declined by 0.009 between 2020 and 2024. While the decline is small, it contradicts any credit claim asserting vegetation growth. SAR data shows biomass structure is stable, suggesting the mangroves are surviving but not expanding. A carbon credit claiming restoration or growth in this zone over this period would not be supported by satellite evidence. Verdict: Needs Review before purchase.
Case Study · Kariba, Zimbabwe · 2019→2023
Kariba REDD+ Carbon Project · VCS-1137
-16.5°N, 28.5°E · Miombo Woodland (REDD+) · Carbon Green Africa · VCS-1137
0
CCIS / 100
Flagged · Reject
SATELLITE EVIDENCE
NDVI: 0.362 (semi-arid) 15 Sentinel-2 + SAR scenes 20% avg cloud cover Net NDVI change: 0.000
Satellite imagery directly contradicts the claimed ecosystem type. The project registered as tropical rainforest but satellite analysis reveals a degraded, semi-arid landscape with a large artificial reservoir (Lake Kariba). AI visual analysis found no evidence of dense forest canopy. All 7 CCIS pillars scored 0/100. The Kariba project has been independently exposed by The Guardian (2023) as one of the largest carbon credit fraud cases ever documented — VeraCarbon's independent satellite verification confirms those findings. Verdict: Reject.
Buffer zone NDVI declined −0.0189 after project start — a leakage signal. Vegetation in the project zone improved only marginally. Additionality not clearly demonstrated against control zone.
VERACARBON FINDING
Forest shows marginal NDVI improvement inside the project zone, but the 5km buffer zone shows a declining vegetation trend beginning after project start — a classic leakage signature. This suggests deforestation may have been displaced to surrounding areas rather than prevented. Additionality score of 61/100 indicates the project zone improvement does not clearly outperform the matched control zone. Field verification is strongly recommended before purchase.
NDVI declined −0.1107 — significant deforestation detected. SAR shows structural biomass loss of −2.34 dB. Forest cover actively reduced during credit period.
VERACARBON FINDING — FLAGGED
Satellite data shows significant forest loss at this location during the credit period. NDVI declined by 0.11 — well above the −0.05 significance threshold — and Sentinel-1 SAR confirms structural biomass loss of 2.34 dB, consistent with active deforestation. This credit is claiming conservation of a forest that satellite data shows was being actively degraded. CCIS of 38/100 is below the minimum acceptable threshold. VeraCarbon recommends rejecting this credit and reporting to the relevant registry for investigation.
Run Your Own Analysis
Submit any carbon credit for independent satellite verification. VeraCarbon accepts any ecosystem type — mangroves, tropical forest, seagrass, grassland, cropland — in any country globally. Results in under 2 minutes.
Whether you're a carbon market buyer, project developer, fund manager, or researcher — we want to hear from you. VeraCarbon is actively seeking partnerships across MENA and Sub-Saharan Africa.
Who We Work With
Four types of partnerships.
Carbon Market Buyers
Companies purchasing carbon credits for ESG reporting, net-zero commitments, or regulatory compliance. VeraCarbon provides pre-purchase verification to protect your investment and your reputation.
Project Developers
Teams developing carbon offset projects across MENA or Sub-Saharan Africa who want independent satellite verification to demonstrate credibility to buyers and registries.
Institutional Investors
Asset managers and sovereign wealth funds building carbon credit portfolios who need systematic due diligence at scale across large numbers of credits.
Researchers & NGOs
Academic institutions and environmental organisations studying carbon market integrity, satellite remote sensing, or ecosystem monitoring across emerging market regions.
Send a Message
Start a conversation.
Message received. We'll be in touch within 48 hours.
