Science-led and data driven

As a science-led organisation, understanding every project we work with inside-out and reflecting industry best practice is key. Our proprietary framework incorporates over 301 data points, covering a comprehensive range of each project’s potential benefits and risks, providing confidence for investment. This level of scrutiny ensures that we provide our clients with access to the highest-quality projects that align with scientific best practices and the latest regulatory standards.

The voluntary carbon market and related climate-policy landscape are moving quickly, and at Klimate we’re playing a pivotal role in moving the sector forward. We have always prioritised integrity and surpassing industry norms, which is why we have only ever invested in removals and why we refine and improve our due diligence assessment every year. The thorough analysis of over 300 parameters and data-points allows us to quantitatively measure and verify the important, physical results of genuine carbon removal.
‍

Why Do We Compare Our Due Diligence to Others?

We’re a small team working towards a big impact. Beyond our deep sector expertise, we’re committed to continuously raising the bar. To do so, we integrate external insights for higher accountability.

Comparing our due diligence against industry standards and top buyers is crucial for several reasons:

• Identifying Excellence – We pinpoint areas where we go above and beyond, such as our extensive data points, or strong environmental and social co-benefits assessment.

• Ensuring Alignment – We verify that the data we gather reflects industry expectations and the requirements of CDR certifications and validation bodies.

• Keeping Up with Best Practices – Regular benchmarking ensures we identify upcoming legislative requirements and expectations in an evolving market with changing policy requirements.

• Testing Our Assumptions – We critically assess our approach against industry-wide standards to identify areas for improvement rather than simply confirming our existing beliefs.

• Driving Continuous Improvement – A mindset of critical thinking ensures we constantly refine our processes.

We consider each of these crucial areas to be a benefit on its own providing learnings that help us get better.

‍

Looking outside: Who We Compare Against and Why

We benchmark our due diligence framework against industry bodies, top buyers, competitors, and consultancies to ensure our assessments remain best-in-class. Key comparisons include:

• Industry standard setters (e.g. ICVCM) to align with leading certification bodies and standard setters that maintain high standards of transparency and quality, and establish method specific expectations.
• Top buyers such as Microsoft, which has one of the most transparent and rigorous CDR purchasing criteria. As a major player in both historic activities and purchase volume, their assessment provides reassurance especially if we may purchase from similar projects.
• Competitors and specialist consultancies to evaluate how our methodology stacks up against emerging research or standards, and where we exceed industry norms.

‍

We conduct these comparisons regularly and methodologically, similar to how we review our own due diligence to improve upon its strengths and address weaknesses. First, we review and extract key metrics and data points from industry-leading frameworks like those above. This often takes the shape of reviewing others’ best practices, policies on quality, or summing high-level data that is publicised. Then, we directly compare our parameters to see how our assessment aligns—and often exceeds—competitor and buyer expectations.

‍

Case Study: Microsoft’s Due Diligence Framework

Microsoft is the largest purchaser of CDR to date and one of the few buyers to have published a detailed CDR criteria framework. Being both a first mover in the space and outpacing others carbon removal investment by a ratio of 8:1, Microsoft has been essential to scaling and developing the high quality removal market we see today.

To champion this leadership and transparency, Microsoft has published their learnings along the way, including their 2024 ‘Criteria for High-Quality Carbon Dioxide Removal’. This provided an opportunity for Klimate to analyse our updated 2024 due diligence against this, comparing their Essential Principles to ensure our framework meets or exceeds their assessment process. As seen in the image below, our team quantified the number of data points covering each principle, to test our assumptions and determine if we had sufficiently matched, if not exceeded, the area.

A few key comparisons:

• Climate Impact – We assess the durability and permanence of carbon removal, risks of leakage, and additionality, all of which align with Microsoft’s principles.

• Project Integrity – Our framework ensures projects adhere to stringent verification standards, in line with Microsoft’s requirements.

• Sustainability & Co-Benefits – Our strong environmental and social impact assessment aligns with Microsoft’s emphasis on responsible and beneficial project outcomes.

‍

By benchmarking against Microsoft’s methodology, we validate that our due diligence framework is among the most robust in the industry, ensuring that our buyers can trust the credibility and integrity of our carbon removal projects.

‍

Looking forwards

Carbon removal is essential for achieving net-zero goals, but its effectiveness relies on integrity and trust. At Klimate, we are committed to refining our due diligence framework by integrating the latest industry insights, policy developments, and scientific advancements. By consistently benchmarking against the best, we ensure that our clients receive the most rigorous, transparent, and high-quality carbon removal solutions available.