Claims · Scenario 3
Biochar + retired CDR credits
You are buying and retiring CSI-certified credits from a project on the platform. You may quantify removal against the footprint of specific products. This is the only scenario that supports a defensible quantified carbon claim.
✓
Use these
Language that is defensible as-is.
- “In [year] we retired [X] tCO₂e of CSI-certified biochar carbon removal credits from the [project name] project.”
- “These credits match [Y]% of the Scope 3 coffee-related emissions for [product/SKU].”
- “Retirement is public and traceable on the CSI registry: [registry URL].”
!
Use with a qualifier
Acceptable only when paired with the right scope or evidence.
- “"Carbon neutral", only if retired credits match 100% of the product's LCA, and the claim scopes which product and which emissions.”
- “"Carbon negative", only if retirements exceed 100% of the product's LCA, and the claim scopes which product and which emissions.”
✗
Don't use these
Will not survive a regulatory or PR challenge.
- “Unscoped "carbon neutral brand" claims that ignore operations outside the retired credits.”
- “"Offset" as a synonym for removal. Biochar is a removal, not an offset.”
- “Retroactive credit application to products sold before the retirement date.”
Regulatory context
A quantified carbon claim is only defensible with a documented LCA, retired credits in the claimant's account, and a clear scope boundary. EU ECGT now effectively requires all three. CA AB 1305 adds disclosure thresholds above $500k of purchases.