{"slug":"carbon-removal-credits-explained","title":"Carbon Removal Credits Explained: Types, Durability, Net-Zero Use and CORSIA","excerpt":"A hub guide to carbon removal credits: how removals differ from avoidance credits, how ARR, soil, blue carbon, biochar, BECCS, DACCS, weathering and mineralisation compare, how buyers use removals for net zero, and which can be used under CORSIA.","date":"2026-11-14","author":"DSTechnoverse","image":"/blog-images/carbon-removal/carbon-removal-credits-explained.svg","category":"CORSIA & Carbon Markets","tags":["Carbon Removal","CDR Credits","Durable Carbon Removal","Net Zero","CORSIA","Oxford Offsetting Principles","Carbon Credits"],"content":"> **Quick answer:** Carbon removal credits represent one tonne of carbon dioxide that has been taken out of the atmosphere and stored, in trees, soils, coastal sediments, stable biochar, rock or underground reservoirs. They differ from avoidance and reduction credits, which pay for emissions that did not happen. Removals vary enormously in durability, from a few decades for forests and soils to many thousands of years for geological storage, and that durability, together with how well the tonne is measured, largely determines what a credit can be used for and what it costs.\n\n![Types of carbon removal credits compared by durability and MRV maturity](/blog-images/carbon-removal/carbon-removal-credits-explained.svg)\n\nCarbon removal credits have moved to the centre of most serious net-zero strategies, and buyers now ask sharper questions: is this tonne a removal or an avoided emission, how long will it stay stored, how was it measured, and can it be used for the claim or compliance obligation I actually have? This hub answers those questions, compares the main types of carbon removal, and gives a carefully hedged view of which carbon removal credits can be used under CORSIA. Where a technology has its own guide, such as our [biochar carbon credits pillar guide](/blog/biochar-carbon-credits-explained/), this page summarises and links.\n\n## What Carbon Removal Credits Actually Are\n\nA carbon removal credit is a transferable certificate, issued by a crediting programme and tracked on a registry, that represents one tonne of CO2 (or CO2-equivalent) removed from the atmosphere and stored. The removal is net: the programme deducts the emissions caused by running the activity, such as fuel, electricity, transport and any leakage, and only the remaining tonnes are credited.\n\nEvery removal has two halves, and both have to work:\n\n1. **Capture.** Carbon is pulled out of the air, either biologically (photosynthesis in trees, crops, algae or seagrass) or chemically (a sorbent in a direct air capture machine, or minerals reacting with CO2).\n2. **Storage.** The captured carbon is put somewhere it will stay. That might be living biomass and soil, coastal sediment, a stable solid such as biochar, a carbonate mineral, or CO2 injected into a deep geological formation.\n\nA tree planted is not a removal until it has grown and been measured; CO2 captured by a machine is not a removal until its storage is verified.\n\n## Carbon Removal vs Avoidance Credits\n\nThe single most important distinction in carbon markets today is between credits that remove carbon from the atmosphere and credits that stop carbon from reaching it in the first place.\n\n| Credit category | What it pays for | Typical examples | Effect on atmospheric CO2 |\n|---|---|---|---|\n| Avoidance | Emissions that would have happened but did not | Avoided deforestation (REDD+), renewable electricity displacing coal, efficient cookstoves | Slows the rate of increase; no CO2 is taken out |\n| Reduction | Lower emissions from an existing source | Landfill gas capture, industrial efficiency, methane destruction | Slows the rate of increase |\n| Removal | CO2 taken out of the atmosphere and stored | Afforestation, soil carbon, biochar, BECCS, direct air capture, enhanced weathering | Lowers the stock of CO2, for as long as the storage lasts |\n\nSome programmes and buyers group avoidance and reduction together as \"emission reductions\", and that is the convention used in most of this guide when contrasting them with removals.\n\nAvoidance and reduction credits are not inherently low quality. Methane destruction and avoided deforestation can deliver very large, real climate benefits, often at low cost. The problem is that they cannot balance an emission in the same physical sense. If a company emits a tonne of fossil CO2 and buys a tonne of avoided emissions, the atmosphere still holds one more tonne than before. If it buys a tonne of durable removal, the extra tonne has, in principle, been taken back out.\n\nThat is why the major net-zero frameworks accept reductions as contributions to climate action but reserve neutralisation of residual emissions for removals. Both categories share integrity questions such as baselines and [additionality](/blog/additionality-in-carbon-credits-explained/). Some projects, such as improved forest management or mangrove restoration, issue both kinds of unit, so check the removal or reduction label on each issuance.\n\n## Types of Carbon Removal Compared\n\nThe table below compares the main types of carbon removal on the attributes buyers care about most. Durability and cost tiers are qualitative and indicative, because they vary widely between projects and change as the market matures. They are not quotations.\n\n| Removal type | Where carbon is stored | Durability | Reversal risk | MRV maturity | Typical standards and registries | Cost tier |\n|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|\n| Afforestation, reforestation and revegetation (ARR) | Trees, roots and soil | Decades, if protected | High: fire, pests, drought, land-use change | Mature but model-based; remote sensing improving | Verra (VCS), Gold Standard, ACR, Climate Action Reserve | Low to moderate |\n| Soil carbon (agricultural land management) | Soil organic matter | Years to decades | High: reverses if practices stop | Developing; sampling and modelling are costly | Verra (VCS), Gold Standard, Climate Action Reserve and others | Low to moderate |\n| Blue carbon (mangroves, seagrass, saltmarsh) | Biomass and waterlogged sediment | Decades to centuries in sediment | Moderate to high: clearance, erosion, sea-level change | Developing; sediment cores and hydrology needed | Verra (VCS), Plan Vivo and others | Moderate |\n| Biochar | Stable carbon in soil or materials | Centuries or longer, depending on stability | Low once applied; tracking risk at end use | Good: batch lab testing | Puro.earth, Isometric, Verra, Carbon Standards International, among others | Moderate |\n| Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS / BiCRS) | CO2 in geological formations | Thousands of years or more | Low with well-selected storage | Good: metered injection plus site monitoring | Puro.earth, Isometric, Verra and others; EU CRCF for BioCCS | High |\n| Direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS) | CO2 in geological formations or mineralised | Thousands of years or more | Low with well-selected storage | Good: metered, though energy accounting is detailed | Puro.earth, Isometric and others; EU CRCF for DACCS | Very high |\n| Enhanced rock weathering (ERW) | Dissolved bicarbonate, later ocean carbonate | Thousands of years or more | Low once weathered; uncertainty is in measurement | Early: field sampling and modelling still evolving | Isometric, Puro.earth and others | Moderate to high |\n| Mineralisation (carbonated materials and in-situ) | Solid carbonate minerals | Effectively permanent on human timescales | Very low | Good for engineered products; developing in-situ | Puro.earth, Isometric and others | Moderate to high |\n\nThe broad split is between nature-based removals, which are cheaper and abundant but reversible, and durable removals, which store carbon far longer but cost more and are scarce. Measurement does not follow that split neatly: biochar and metered geological storage are often easier to quantify than a hectare of soil.\n\nFor a fuller treatment of how programmes differ, see [carbon credit standards explained](/blog/carbon-credit-standards-explained/) and [carbon credit registries compared](/blog/carbon-credit-registries-compared/).\n\n## Nature-Based Removals: ARR, Soil Carbon and Blue Carbon\n\n### Afforestation, Reforestation and Revegetation\n\nARR is the largest source of removal credits by volume. Carbon in new or regrowing forest is estimated from plot measurements, allometric equations and, increasingly, satellite and lidar data. Supply is large and co-benefits strong, but forests burn, die back or get cleared, and estimates need regular ground-truthing. Our guides on [REDD+ and afforestation projects](/blog/redd-and-afforestation-carbon-projects/) and the [ARR monitoring case study](/blog/afforestation-reforestation-arr-carbon-removals-case-study/) cover the practicalities.\n\n### Soil Carbon\n\nCover crops, reduced tillage, improved grazing and organic amendments can raise soil organic carbon across very large areas. Soil carbon is, however, the hardest removal to measure: it varies within a field, changes slowly relative to sampling error, and is lost if practices stop. Credible methodologies combine repeated sampling with calibrated models and conservative uncertainty deductions. Treat it as a shorter-durability removal.\n\n### Blue Carbon\n\nMangroves, seagrass and saltmarshes store carbon in biomass and in waterlogged sediments, where it can stay for centuries if the ecosystem is protected. Measurement needs sediment cores and hydrology, and community tenure is central. Our guide to [blue carbon credits](/blog/blue-carbon-credits-explained/) covers the detail; here, the point is that blue carbon sits between forests and durable removals on durability, and close to forests on reversal risk.\n\n## Durable Carbon Removal: Biochar, BECCS, DACCS, Weathering and Mineralisation\n\n\"Durable carbon removal\" usually means storage expected to last for at least a century, and often far longer. Several buyer groups and frameworks draw the line at different places, from 100 years to 1,000 years, so always check which definition a buyer, programme or claim standard uses.\n\n### Biochar\n\nBiochar is biomass heated with little oxygen into a stable carbon solid that is then mixed into soil or materials such as concrete. It is currently the largest source of delivered durable removals because it is relatively mature and measurable batch by batch. For detail, see the comparison of [biochar carbon credit methodologies](/blog/biochar-carbon-credit-methodologies/), the guide to [biochar carbon credit prices](/blog/biochar-carbon-credit-price/) and the step-by-step guide on [how to start a biochar carbon project](/blog/how-to-start-a-biochar-carbon-project/).\n\n### BECCS and BiCRS\n\nBECCS captures CO2 from biomass used for energy and stores it geologically; the broader term BiCRS also covers routes such as bio-oil injection. Injected tonnes are metered and durability is very long, so the integrity questions shift upstream to biomass sustainability and supply-chain emissions. Projects are large, so supply arrives in big blocks through long-term offtakes.\n\n### Direct Air Capture With Storage\n\nDirect air capture pulls CO2 from ambient air with sorbents or solvents for storage underground or in minerals. It is energy-intensive and the most expensive removal type, and its credibility depends on life-cycle energy accounting. Our guide to [direct air capture and engineered carbon removals](/blog/direct-air-capture-carbon-removal/) covers the technology and price outlook; here it is enough to note that DACCS is the benchmark for durability and the ceiling for cost.\n\n### Enhanced Rock Weathering\n\nCrushed silicate rock such as basalt is spread on farmland, where it reacts with CO2 to form bicarbonate that can stay stored for many thousands of years. The difficulty is measuring how much weathering has occurred and how much carbon reaches long-term storage, so expect conservative crediting and frequent protocol updates.\n\n### Mineralisation\n\nMineralisation locks CO2 into carbonate minerals, either in products such as CO2-cured concrete or in situ in reactive rock. Durability is effectively permanent; the questions are whether the CO2 came from the air or biogenic sources, and who owns the claim when carbon ends up in a product.\n\n## How Durability and Reversal Risk Are Handled\n\nDifferent removals lose carbon in different ways, and programmes have developed several tools for managing the risk.\n\n| Mechanism | How it works | Mainly used for |\n|---|---|---|\n| Buffer pool | A share of each issuance is held back in a pooled reserve; if a reversal occurs, buffer credits are cancelled to cover it | ARR, soil carbon, blue carbon, IFM |\n| Monitoring and reversal reporting | The project must monitor stored carbon for a defined period and report losses | All nature-based removals; geological storage sites |\n| Durability discount | Credited tonnes are reduced to reflect the fraction expected to remain after a set period, such as 100 years | Biochar, some ERW |\n| Storage site regulation | Geological storage under regulated permits with long-term liability arrangements | BECCS, DACCS, in-situ mineralisation |\n| Insurance and replacement obligations | Contractual or insured commitment to replace lost tonnes | Increasingly used across removal types |\n\nA tonne of ARR backed by a buffer and a tonne of DACCS backed by geological monitoring are both labelled one tonne removed, but they are not the same product.\n\n## What Makes a Removal Tonne Credible\n\nWhatever the technology, a credible carbon removal credit should satisfy a short list of tests. These overlap with the general framework in our guide to [assessing carbon credit quality](/blog/carbon-credit-quality-assessment/) and the [ICVCM Core Carbon Principles](/blog/icvcm-core-carbon-principles/), but with a removal-specific emphasis.\n\n1. **Net removal.** All project emissions and leakage are deducted within a clear life-cycle boundary.\n2. **Measured storage.** Quantification uses measurements where possible, with conservative models and uncertainty deductions.\n3. **Stated durability.** The expected storage period and its evidence are explicit.\n4. **Reversal handling.** A buffer, monitoring obligation or replacement commitment covers lost carbon.\n5. **Additionality.** A forest that would have regrown anyway is not additional.\n6. **No double counting.** No product maker, host inventory or other buyer claims the same tonne without adjustment.\n7. **Independent verification and safeguards.** An accredited verifier has checked the issuance, and land rights and community impacts are addressed.\n\n## Standards, Registries and Labels for CDR Credits\n\nCDR (carbon dioxide removal) credits come from general programmes such as Verra, Gold Standard, ACR and the Climate Action Reserve, which carry most nature-based volume; from removal specialists such as Puro.earth (which issues CO2 Removal Certificates, or CORCs) and Isometric; and from certifiers such as Carbon Standards International for biochar.\n\nSeveral labels and frameworks then sit on top of the programmes:\n\n- **ICVCM CCP labels.** The Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market assesses programmes and methodology categories against its Core Carbon Principles. Puro.earth, for example, was confirmed as a CCP-Eligible programme in December 2025. Check the ICVCM site for which specific removal methodologies currently carry CCP approval, because the list changes.\n- **EU CRCF.** The EU's Carbon Removals and Carbon Farming certification framework, Regulation (EU) 2024/3012, is a voluntary EU certification system. The first methodologies for permanent removals, covering DACCS, BioCCS and biochar, were adopted by the Commission in early 2026, with further methodologies for carbon farming and bio-based construction products expected to follow.\n- **Article 6 authorisation.** Where a host country authorises units for international use and applies a corresponding adjustment, the units can be used for purposes that require them, including CORSIA. See [Article 6 of the Paris Agreement](/blog/article-6-paris-agreement-explained/).\n\nBuyer coalitions such as Frontier, an advance market commitment launched in 2022, and public trackers such as CDR.fyi also shape the market; tracker averages are useful context but hide wide ranges between pathways.\n\n## How Buyers Use Carbon Removal Credits\n\n### Net-Zero Claims and Residual Emissions\n\nCredible net-zero frameworks share one logic: cut emissions as deeply as possible, neutralise the residual emissions left at the target date with removals, and meanwhile finance mitigation beyond the value chain. Our explainer on [carbon neutral vs net zero](/blog/carbon-neutral-vs-net-zero/) sets out how these claims differ.\n\n### SBTi and Removals\n\nThe Science Based Targets initiative published its Corporate Net-Zero Standard Version 2.0 in June 2026. As summarised in SBTi's main changes document and reviewed by several advisers, the new version requires companies at net zero to neutralise residual emissions with carbon removals, with residual long-lived greenhouse gases such as fossil CO2 to be neutralised with long-lived removals. It also expects larger companies to support removals for a rising share of ongoing emissions before net zero. Read the standard itself, as transition timings apply. See our introduction to [science-based targets](/blog/science-based-targets-sbti-explained/) for the basics.\n\n### The Oxford Offsetting Principles\n\nThe Oxford Principles for Net Zero Aligned Carbon Offsetting were first published by the University of Oxford in 2020 and revised in February 2024. They remain one of the most cited buyer frameworks. In summary they ask organisations to:\n\n1. Cut their own emissions first, use high-quality credits, and disclose how they use them.\n2. Shift offsetting over time towards carbon removals.\n3. Shift towards removals with durable storage and low reversal risk, so that residual emissions at net zero are balanced by long-lived removals.\n4. Support the development of a market for net-zero aligned offsets, including through long-term contracts.\n\nThe 2024 revision treats durability as a continuum and accepts that high-quality avoidance credits still have a short- and medium-term role. The message is a portfolio that shifts over time.\n\nRemovals financed inside a company's own supply chain follow different accounting rules; see [carbon insetting vs offsetting](/blog/carbon-insetting-vs-offsetting/).\n\n## Which Carbon Removal Credits Are Eligible for CORSIA\n\nCORSIA, the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation, does not maintain a list of eligible project types. Instead, the ICAO Council approves crediting programmes, each with a defined scope of eligibility, and then requires each unit to meet unit-level conditions. The Emissions Unit Criteria that programmes are assessed against include a permanence criterion, so removals are not excluded in principle, but whether a specific removal credit can be used depends on the programme, the methodology and the unit's paperwork. The following reflects public sources available in November 2026 and should be checked against ICAO's current CORSIA Eligible Emissions Units document before any purchase.\n\n### Approved Programmes for the First Phase (2024 to 2026)\n\nAccording to ICAO's CORSIA Eligible Emissions Units document of April 2026, as reported by market commentators, ten programmes were approved to supply units for the first phase compliance period: the American Carbon Registry, ART, the BioCarbon Fund Initiative for Sustainable Forest Landscapes, the Climate Action Reserve, the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility, the Global Carbon Council, Gold Standard, Isometric, Thailand's Premium T-VER and Verra's VCS. Some of these, such as ART and the jurisdictional forest programmes, issue mainly jurisdictional REDD+ reductions rather than removals.\n\n### Where Removals Fit, Programme by Programme\n\n| Programme | Removal position under CORSIA (as publicly reported) |\n|---|---|\n| Isometric | The first removal-focused programme approved for CORSIA. Conditionally approved in December 2024 and announced as approved for the first phase in November 2025. Public commentary reports its eligible scope as limited to biochar (stored in soils or construction materials) and direct air capture (stored in saline aquifers or construction materials). |\n| Gold Standard | Its own CORSIA guideline (document 115G) lists ICAO exclusions that include all activities using methodologies in its Engineered Removals category, and restrictions on land use and forestry activities, with exceptions for certain soil organic carbon, agriculture and livestock methodologies. Exclusions differ between the first and second phases. |\n| Verra (VCS) | Approved for the first phase and, in November 2025, for the 2027 to 2029 compliance period. ICAO removed the exclusion on VM0049 (carbon capture and storage) for certain projects. Other methodology-level exclusions must be checked in the ICAO document. |\n| ACR, Climate Action Reserve, GCC | Approved, with programme-specific scopes. Removal methodologies such as ARR may be within scope subject to the listed exclusions. |\n| Puro.earth | Has applied to ICAO; a TAB document lists the Puro Program in the 2026 assessment cycle for consideration in early 2027. Not shown as approved in the public sources reviewed. Its ICVCM CCP-Eligible status is a separate matter. |\n\nIn September 2026 Japan Airlines and Climeworks Solutions announced what they described as the first purchase agreement for carbon removal credits designed to meet CORSIA requirements, reportedly a portfolio including approaches such as biochar and soil carbon sourced to meet ICAO's eligibility rules. That is a useful signal, but it does not mean that every removal credit can be used for CORSIA.\n\n### Unit-Level Conditions\n\nEven within an approved programme and an eligible methodology, each unit must satisfy conditions that ICAO and the programmes publish. For the first phase these broadly include:\n\n- The activity's first crediting period started on or after 1 January 2016.\n- The removal or reduction occurred between 1 January 2021 and 31 December 2026 (the window extends to 31 December 2029 for the 2027 to 2029 compliance period).\n- The host country has issued a letter of authorisation for use in CORSIA, with an attestation that it will avoid double claiming, normally through a corresponding adjustment.\n- Programme-specific requirements are met, which for some programmes includes an approved insurance or guarantee arrangement covering the risk that a corresponding adjustment is not applied.\n\nFor durable removals, the authorisation requirement is often the practical bottleneck. Relatively few host countries have issued letters of authorisation for engineered or biochar projects, and some removal projects are located in countries that have not yet set up their Article 6 processes. Our guides to [corresponding adjustments in CORSIA](/blog/corresponding-adjustments-corsia-explained/), [which carbon projects qualify for CORSIA](/blog/carbon-projects-qualify-for-corsia/) and the knowledge base page on [CORSIA eligible emissions units](/knowledge-base/corsia-eligible-emissions-units/) explain these conditions. For the whole scheme, see the [CORSIA carbon credits complete guide](/blog/corsia-carbon-credits-complete-guide/).\n\n### What This Means in Practice\n\n- Nature-based removals such as ARR can be CORSIA-eligible if issued under an approved programme, outside any listed exclusion, and fully authorised. Gold Standard land-use units face specific exclusions.\n- Biochar and DAC credits can reach CORSIA through Isometric's approved scope, subject to authorisation and the unit-level conditions. Biochar credits from programmes not yet approved cannot be used, whatever their quality.\n- CCS-based removals under Verra's VM0049 may be eligible for certain projects following the November 2025 change.\n- Enhanced weathering, mineralisation and BECCS credits should be treated as not yet established CORSIA routes unless the specific programme scope and unit label confirm eligibility.\n\nBecause programme scopes change at each ICAO Council decision, the only safe test is the current ICAO document plus a CORSIA label on the specific unit in the registry.\n\n## Worked Example: Building a Removal Portfolio\n\nThe following example uses illustrative numbers only. It is not a price quote or a recommendation.\n\nA manufacturing company has a 2040 net-zero target. Its current emissions are 200,000 tonnes CO2e a year and its transition plan expects residual emissions of around 20,000 tonnes a year at the target date, mostly from process heat that is hard to electrify. It wants to follow the Oxford Principles and prepare for SBTi requirements.\n\n| Period | Annual credits | Share avoidance or reduction | Share nature-based removal | Share durable removal |\n|---|---|---|---|---|\n| 2027 to 2030 | 30,000 | 60% | 30% | 10% |\n| 2031 to 2035 | 25,000 | 30% | 45% | 25% |\n| 2036 to 2040 | 22,000 | 10% | 40% | 50% |\n| From 2040 | 20,000 | 0% | Short-lived removals only for non-fossil residuals | Long-lived removals for all fossil CO2 residuals |\n\nEarly purchases are reported as contributions beyond the value chain, not neutralisation. The company signs a small biochar offtake now and adds long-term geological storage contracts in the middle period, so that by 2040 fossil residuals are matched with durable removals. The lesson is that durable tonnes are contracted years before they are needed, and the blend shifts gradually, spreading cost.\n\n## How to Choose Carbon Removal Credits: Step by Step\n\n1. **Define the claim.** Contribution, net-zero neutralisation, SBTi-aligned or a compliance obligation such as CORSIA; the claim sets the durability and labels you need.\n2. **Set durability thresholds** for each part of the portfolio, using your framework's definitions.\n3. **Screen programmes and methodologies,** including CCP labels and, for CORSIA, ICAO scope.\n4. **Check the units, not just the project:** vintage, removal label, authorisation, corresponding adjustment and CORSIA label.\n5. **Review MRV and reversal handling** in the monitoring report, verification statement and buffer contribution.\n6. **Choose the contract form,** spot, forward offtake or pre-purchase, and allocate delivery, reversal and authorisation risk.\n7. **Retire and disclose** the type, durability and programme of each removal.\n\nOur step-by-step guide on [how to buy carbon credits](/blog/how-to-buy-carbon-credits-guide/) covers the transaction process in more detail, and the [DSTechnoverse marketplace](/marketplace/) lists available projects.\n\n## Common Mistakes With Removal Credits\n\n- **Treating all removals as equal.** Soil carbon and geological storage are different products with different risks.\n- **Assuming removal means CORSIA-eligible.** Eligibility depends on programme scope and unit authorisation.\n- **Ignoring double claiming in products.** Carbon in concrete may also be claimed by the product maker; the contract should say who owns the claim.\n- **Leaving durable supply too late.** Durable removals are scarce, and waiting until the target year is risky.\n\n## How DSTechnoverse Helps\n\nDSTechnoverse supports both sides of the carbon removal market. For project developers, we help assess feasibility, choose a programme and methodology, design MRV and monitoring data systems, prepare documentation, support certification and connect projects with buyers. For buyers and sustainability teams, we carry out due diligence on removal credits, check programme scope and CORSIA eligibility, review authorisation and corresponding adjustment evidence, and help structure a portfolio that matches the claim you intend to make. Read more about our [carbon market and CORSIA advisory services](/services/corsia-carbon-credit-services/), browse the [carbon credit marketplace](/marketplace/), or [contact us](/contact/) to discuss a specific project or purchase.\n\n## Frequently Asked Questions\n\n### What are carbon removal credits?\n\nCarbon removal credits are certificates that each represent one tonne of CO2 taken out of the atmosphere and stored, after deducting the emissions of running the activity. They are issued by crediting programmes and tracked on registries. Storage can be in trees, soils, coastal sediments, biochar, minerals or geological formations, and how long the carbon stays stored varies enormously between these types.\n\n### What is the difference between carbon removal and avoidance credits?\n\nAvoidance credits pay for emissions that would have happened but did not, such as avoided deforestation or renewable electricity replacing fossil power. Removal credits pay for CO2 that has been taken out of the atmosphere and stored. Both can be high quality, but only removals reduce the stock of atmospheric CO2, which is why net-zero frameworks reserve neutralisation of residual emissions for removals.\n\n### What are the main types of carbon removal?\n\nThe main types are afforestation and reforestation, soil carbon, blue carbon, biochar, bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, direct air capture with storage, enhanced rock weathering and mineralisation. The first three are nature-based, cheaper and abundant but reversible. The others are usually described as durable or engineered removals, storing carbon for centuries to many thousands of years at a higher cost.\n\n### What counts as durable carbon removal?\n\nDurable carbon removal generally means storage expected to last at least a century and often far longer, such as biochar, geological storage of CO2 from BECCS or DACCS, enhanced weathering and mineralisation. There is no single legal definition: buyer groups and frameworks set thresholds from around 100 years to 1,000 years or more, so check the definition used by the claim or buyer you are working with.\n\n### What are CDR credits?\n\nCDR stands for carbon dioxide removal, so CDR credits are simply carbon removal credits. The term is used most often for durable and engineered removals such as biochar, direct air capture, BECCS and enhanced weathering, especially by removal-specialist programmes, buyer coalitions and market trackers. Some people use it for all removals, including forestry and soil carbon, so it is worth confirming the scope.\n\n### Which carbon removal credits are eligible for CORSIA?\n\nOnly units issued by an ICAO-approved programme, within its approved scope and meeting unit-level conditions such as vintage and host-country authorisation. Isometric's approved scope is reported to cover biochar and direct air capture pathways. ARR and some CCS units under approved programmes may qualify, subject to exclusions. Puro.earth was still under assessment in the sources reviewed. Always check the current ICAO document and the unit's registry label.\n\n### What are the Oxford Offsetting Principles?\n\nThey are a University of Oxford framework, first published in 2020 and revised in 2024, for net-zero aligned use of carbon credits. They ask organisations to cut emissions first, use high-quality credits transparently, shift towards removals, shift towards durable storage with low reversal risk, and support the market for net-zero aligned offsets through long-term commitments. They are widely cited by buyers and claim standards.\n\n### Can nature-based removals be used for net-zero claims?\n\nNature-based removals can support net-zero strategies, particularly before the target date and for non-fossil residual emissions where frameworks allow. However, frameworks such as the Oxford Principles and SBTi's net-zero standard expect residual fossil CO2 emissions at net zero to be balanced with long-lived removals. Nature-based removals are best used as part of a portfolio that shifts towards durable storage over time.\n\n### Why are durable removals so much more expensive?\n\nDurable removals often need specialised equipment, energy, transport and storage infrastructure, and many are produced at small scale while the industry is still building its first plants. Measurement and verification can also be demanding. Prices vary widely between pathways, with biochar usually lower than direct air capture. Costs are expected to fall as volumes grow, but by how much remains uncertain.\n\n### How do I check whether a removal credit is genuine?\n\nLook the unit up on the issuing registry, confirm that it is labelled as a removal, check its vintage and status, and read the monitoring report and verification statement. Then review the methodology, reversal handling, any ICVCM label and, if relevant, Article 6 authorisation and CORSIA labelling. A seller who cannot provide this documentation should be treated with caution.\n\n---\n\n**Developing a biochar or carbon removal project, or buying removal credits?** DSTechnoverse supports project developers with feasibility, methodology selection, MRV design and certification, and helps buyers with due diligence and portfolio decisions. See our [carbon market advisory](/services/corsia-carbon-credit-services/) or [talk to our team](/contact/).","related":[{"slug":"corsia-carbon-credits-complete-guide","title":"CORSIA Carbon Credits: The Complete Guide for Buyers and Project Developers"},{"slug":"what-is-carbon-credit","title":"What Is a Carbon Credit? Definition, How It Works and Who Uses It"},{"slug":"biochar-carbon-credit-methodologies","title":"Biochar Carbon Credit Methodologies Compared: Puro.earth, Verra VM0044, Isometric and Global C-Sink"},{"slug":"biochar-carbon-credit-price","title":"Biochar Carbon Credit Price: What Drives It, Who Buys and How to Achieve More"}]}