Methodology
RIV-REC-01-ELEC
V2.1
Overall Available Credits
39083
tCO₂eq
Overall forecasted delivery
227445
tCO₂eq
Most used mechanism
Avoidance
Last Update
August 2, 2024
using this methodology
10
Projects
Small IT and telecommunication equipment contribute around 2% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, with a rapidly growing impact. These devices also consume rare minerals and produce increasing amounts of hazardous waste, with the greatest environmental impact occurring during manufacturing. Extending device lifetimes through repair and refurbishment significantly reduces emissions by lessening the need for new production and decreasing electronic waste.
The Riverse methodology supports projects that collect, repair, and resell small electronic devices, promoting a circular economy. This document provides a concise overview of our methodology.
Reconditioning electronic devices involves a series of steps aimed at restoring used devices to a functional and presentable condition. The process typically includes:
The IT refurbishing model quantification takes into account every part of a project-based comparative life-cycle assessment.
The methodology quantifies GHG emissions avoided compared to baseline scenarios using the ISO 14064-2 standard. Key aspects include:
Because the carbon credits are of the type 'avoidance' and not 'removal,' issuance is done ex-post. Therefore, the sequestration horizon for permanence does not need to be considered.
Riverse ensures that carbon financing spurs additional climate action by enabling solutions that wouldn't occur without carbon finance revenue. Carbon credits cannot be issued for activities that would have happened anyway.
The EU has introduced the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive and the RoHS Directive to prevent WEEE generation and promote resource efficiency through re-use, recycling, and other forms of recovery. The WEEE Directive (2012/19/EU) sets targets for collecting e-waste, but according to Eurostat data, many countries have not yet met their targets. There are currently no regulations requiring electronic device refurbishing. Thus, electronic device refurbishing projects remain voluntary and are not obligatory for compliance. Any increase in electronic device refurbishing and WEEE recycling thanks to the support of these regulations is included in the GHG reduction quantifications.
Electronic device refurbishing projects will typically prove their additionality using barrier analysis. This analysis shows that they face financial, technological, or institutional barriers that pose a threat to their overall operations, and that can only be overcome with solutions funded by carbon finance. For example:
Instead of barrier analysis, electronic device refurbishing projects may use investment analysis to prove that they need carbon financing to invest in expansion and scale up their activities, and that the investment would not pay for itself. For example:
Note that for investments in expansion, only the additional activities enabled by the expansion shall be eligible for Riverse Carbon Credits.
Each project has to prove it does not cause significant social or environmental harm on the following points:
A risk matrix is assessed for all projects and validated during VVB audit.
Leakage may occur when emissions are shifted upstream or downstream in the supply chain and outside the project’s direct scope. Such emissions shall be included by default in the GHG reduction quantification, as part of the life-cycle approach. The upstream and downstream emissions included in the quantification are detailed in the Baseline Scenario and Project Scenario sections.
Leakage may occur when carbon-emitting activities are geographically displaced or relocated to areas outside the project boundaries as a direct result of the project's implementation. For electronic device refurbishing, this includes:
There is a risk that e-waste is transferred to different countries with less stringent waste treatment standards than their original country. This can occur in the form of:
Project Developers shall transparently evaluate the above leakage risks in the Design Document Package (DPD), plus any other project-specific leakage risks deemed relevant by the Project Developer, the Riverse Certification team, or the VVB.
To verify avoided emissions and monitor projects, Project Developers must submit on a regular basis (at least annually):
We adhere to the ISO14064-2 standard to accurately quantify GHG emissions reductions and sequestration. Our approach ensures that all calculations are transparent, consistent, and reliable.
Every project undergoes rigorous validation and recurring verification/monitoring audits by accredited Validation and Verification Bodies (VVBs). This process guarantees the credibility and accuracy of our projects' emissions reductions.
Overall Available Credits
39083
tCO₂eq
All projects must comply with the following eligibility criteria: Measurability, Reality, Additionality, Permanence (not applicable here, avoidance credits), No Double Counting, Co-benefits, Substitution, Environmental and Social Do No Harm, Leakage, Technology Readiness Level, Target Alignments, and Minimum Impact.
Version management is handled through a system that ensures consistency and traceability of changes.
Visit our FAQ page or contact us to learn more