Thailand's voluntary emission reduction programme, T-VER, attracts a broad range of project developers — but the proportion passing validation on the first attempt is not high. Five issues recur.
1. A baseline that cannot be evidenced
The baseline is what would have happened without the project, which by definition cannot be observed. It therefore needs supporting evidence: a sufficiently long and continuous history of energy consumption, or comparative data from similar operations. A baseline resting solely on an engineer's estimate rarely survives.
2. Incomplete additionality reasoning
If the project is already financially viable without carbon revenue, the additionality question arises immediately. A credible analysis must show concrete barriers — financial, technological or practical — with evidence behind them rather than assertion.
3. A monitoring plan that cannot actually be executed
A number of project design documents set out elegant measurement plans, only for verification to find no meter at the stated point, or no records at the stated frequency. Write the monitoring plan from what the site can genuinely deliver.
4. Instrument calibration
Instruments generating carbon credit data need current, traceable calibration records. It looks like administrative housekeeping; it causes findings far more often than it should.
5. Documentation starting later than the project
Timing requirements matter. An investment decision clearly taken before any consideration of the mechanism can affect the additionality assessment. Developers should retain decision records from the outset.
A practical recommendation
Have a validation body look at the project design document while it is still a draft, not after submission. Fixing a baseline or monitoring issue at draft stage takes weeks; fixing it after submission can cost an entire crediting period.
This article is published for general information and does not constitute professional advice on any specific matter. To discuss your organisation’s situation, please contact our team.
