Nearly all existing carbon credits generated by cleaner cookstove projects cannot use a market-leading quality label unless they switch to more stringent methods of calculating emission reductions approved by a leading voluntary carbon market watchdog.
The Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market (ICVCM) announced on Friday that it rejected two popular rulebooks for carbon offsetting activities that aim to reduce emissions by introducing more fuel-efficient cookstoves in households primarily in the Global South. The carbon savings are then sold as carbon credits.
Credits issued under the methodologies, currently used by most cookstove projects, cannot claim the “Core Carbon Principles” (CCP) seal of approval after the ICVCM judged their criteria to be “insufficiently rigorous”. Another rulebook used by hundreds of projects was withdrawn from the assessment process after carbon standard Verra developed a replacement methodology.
64% of all cookstove offsets available in the market at the end of 2024 were based on those methodologies, according to an analysis of data published by the Berkeley Carbon Trading Project. The projects have been questioned for overstating their climate benefits.
Cooking the books: cookstove offsets produce millions of fake emission cuts
More rigorous rules approved
On Friday, ICVCM also approved Verra’s new method and two other rulebooks proposed by Gold Standard for developing cookstove activities on the condition that projects also comply with stricter technical criteria to assess emission reductions and reduce the risk of generating too many offsets.
Carbon credits produced under the approved methodologies accounted for less than 3% of available cookstove offsets at the end of 2024. It is not yet clear how many of those credits respect the additional requirements imposed by ICVCM.
A spokesperson for Gold Standard said “further assessment” will be required to ensure compliance and more specific guidelines for projects seeking CCP-labelling will be made available soon.
Additionally, ICVCM still needs to rule on the eligibility of over 28 million cookstove credits – 33% of the total – issued under older versions of a Gold Standard methodology.
Annette Nazareth, ICVCM chair, said “we understand many existing projects will choose to use the new methodologies and conditions we have approved today”.
Verra will require developers to update their current projects to the new methodology approved by ICVCM by 2027, a spokesperson said, adding that the body’s decision represents “an important shift towards higher integrity in the market”.
“We recognize the importance of this type of project for unlocking climate finance and enabling sustainable development as well as the positive impact of cookstoves at the household level,” added ICVCM’s Nazareth.
Trump’s aid cuts make Malawians more vulnerable to climate change
A faltering market
Carbon markets have long been touted as key for funding programmes aiding communities in the Global South shift towards cleaner and healthier way of cooking. Over 2 billion people worldwide – half of whom are in Africa – lack access to clean cooking methods, according to the International Energ Agency (IEA).
Carbon project developers provide households with improved cookstoves that are either powered with cleaner energy or require less firewood or charcoal. Project owners can then sell the savings in carbon emissions as credits to third parties seeking to reduce their carbon footprint.
A tale of two women: What climate vulnerability actually looks like
But cookstoves projects developed under the methods rejected by the ICVCM have been found to grossly overestimate their climate benefits by issuing more carbon credits than they should.
Researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, found in a large-scale study published last year that on average cookstove projects produced over 10 times more offsets than they should have done. They said that is because the rules allowed project developers to overestimate the impact of fuel collection on deforestation and to overstate how often people use the new cookstoves.
A Climate Home investigation found similar issues across a number of projects in India.
Reeling from scandals
The ICVCM said on Friday that older methodologies lacked either “best practice” measurement methods or effective controls on avoiding overestimation from fuel savings.
Its CEO Amy Merrill said that the approval of new methods “will strengthen the sector for the future” and “provide the confidence needed to ensure that carbon finance can flow into these projects”.
ICVCM said it expects “several hundred thousand” CCP-labeled cookstove credits to be issued in the coming year thanks to a “large pipeline” of new projects planning to use the approved methodologies.
The market for cookstove carbon credits has been reeling from a major scandal over the past several months.
Kenneth Newcombe, former CEO of leading developer C-Quest Capital, was charged in October 2024 with fraud by US authorities which accused him of faking emissions-reduction data of cookstove projects across Africa and Asia as part of a scheme to obtain millions of carbon credits. A spokesperson for Newcombe denied the allegations at the time.
In the aftermath of the investigation, Verra cancelled 5 million credits generated by C-Quest Capital projects to compensate for the excess issuances.
At the end of February 2025, C-Quest Capital filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in the US state of Delaware citing financial distress. Private equity firm Vision Ridge, a major investor in the company, sought $170.6 million in damages, according to court filings.
The post Most cookstove carbon credits ruled out of quality scheme in push for high-integrity appeared first on Climate Home News.
Most cookstove carbon credits ruled out of quality scheme in integrity push
Climate Change
Greenpeace organisations to appeal USD $345 million court judgment in Energy Transfer’s intimidation lawsuit
SYDNEY, Saturday 28 February 2026 — Greenpeace International and Greenpeace organisations in the US announce they will seek a new trial and, if necessary, appeal the decision with the North Dakota Supreme Court following a North Dakota District Court judgment today awarding Energy Transfer (ET) USD $345 million.

ET’s SLAPP suit remains a blatant attempt to silence free speech, erase Indigenous leadership of the Standing Rock movement, and punish solidarity with peaceful resistance to the Dakota Access Pipeline. Greenpeace International will also continue to seek damages for ET’s bullying lawsuits under EU anti-SLAPP legislation in the Netherlands.
Mads Christensen, Greenpeace International Executive Director said: “Energy Transfer’s attempts to silence us are failing. Greenpeace International will continue to resist intimidation tactics. We will not be silenced. We will only get louder, joining our voices to those of our allies all around the world against the corporate polluters and billionaire oligarchs who prioritise profits over people and the planet.
“With hard-won freedoms under threat and the climate crisis accelerating, the stakes of this legal fight couldn’t be higher. Through appeals in the US and Greenpeace International’s groundbreaking anti-SLAPP case in the Netherlands, we are exploring every option to hold Energy Transfer accountable for multiple abusive lawsuits and show all power-hungry bullies that their attacks will only result in a stronger people-powered movement.”
The Court’s final judgment today rejects some of the jury verdict delivered in March 2025, but still awards hundreds of millions of dollars to ET without a sound basis in law. The Greenpeace defendants will continue to press their arguments that the US Constitution does not allow liability here, that ET did not present evidence to support its claims, that the Court admitted inflammatory and irrelevant evidence at trial and excluded other evidence supporting the defense, and that the jury pool in Mandan could not be impartial.[1][2]
ET’s back-to-back lawsuits against Greenpeace International and the US organisations Greenpeace USA (Greenpeace Inc.) and Greenpeace Fund are clear-cut examples of SLAPPs — lawsuits attempting to bury nonprofits and activists in legal fees, push them towards bankruptcy and ultimately silence dissent.[3] Greenpeace International, which is based in the Netherlands, is pursuing justice in Europe, with a suit against ET under Dutch law and the European Union’s new anti-SLAPP directive, a landmark test of the new legislation which could help set a powerful precedent against corporate bullying.[4]
Kate Smolski, Program Director at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said: “This is part of a worrying trend globally: fossil fuel corporations are increasingly using litigation to attack and silence ordinary people and groups using the law to challenge their polluting operations — and we’re not immune to these tactics here in Australia.
“Rulings like this have a chilling effect on democracy and public interest litigation — we must unite against these silencing tactics as bad for Australians and bad for our democracy. Our movement is stronger than any corporate bully, and grows even stronger when under attack.”
Energy Transfer’s SLAPPs are part of a wave of abusive lawsuits filed by Big Oil companies like Shell, Total, and ENI against Greenpeace entities in recent years.[3] A couple of these cases have been successfully stopped in their tracks. This includes Greenpeace France successfully defeating TotalEnergies’ SLAPP on 28 March 2024, and Greenpeace UK and Greenpeace International forcing Shell to back down from its SLAPP on 10 December 2024.
-ENDS-
Images available in Greenpeace Media Library
Notes:
[1] The judgment entered by North Dakota District Court Judge Gion follows a jury verdict finding Greenpeace entities liable for more than US$660 million on March 19, 2025. Judge Gion subsequently threw out several items from the jury’s verdict, reducing the total damages to approximately US$345 million.
[2] Public statements from the independent Trial Monitoring Committee
[3] Energy Transfer’s first lawsuit was filed in federal court in 2017 under the RICO Act – the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, a US federal statute designed to prosecute mob activity. The case was dismissed in 2019, with the judge stating the evidence fell “far short” of what was needed to establish a RICO enterprise. The federal court did not decide on Energy Transfer’s claims based on state law, so Energy Transfer promptly filed a new case in a North Dakota state court with these and other state law claims.
[4] Greenpeace International sent a Notice of Liability to Energy Transfer on 23 July 2024, informing the pipeline giant of Greenpeace International’s intention to bring an anti-SLAPP lawsuit against the company in a Dutch Court. After Energy Transfer declined to accept liability on multiple occasions (September 2024, December 2024), Greenpeace International initiated the first test of the European Union’s anti-SLAPP Directive on 11 February 2025 by filing a lawsuit in Dutch court against Energy Transfer. The case was officially registered in the docket of the Court of Amsterdam on 2 July, 2025. Greenpeace International seeks to recover all damages and costs it has suffered as a result of Energy Transfers’s back-to-back, abusive lawsuits demanding hundreds of millions of dollars from Greenpeace International and the Greenpeace organisations in the US. The next hearing in the Court of Amsterdam is scheduled for 16 April, 2026.
Media contact:
Kate O’Callaghan on 0406 231 892 or kate.ocallaghan@greenpeace.org
Climate Change
Former EPA Staff Detail Expanding Pollution Risks Under Trump
The Trump administration’s relentless rollback of public health and environmental protections has allowed widespread toxic exposures to flourish, warn experts who helped implement safeguards now under assault.
In a new report that outlines a dozen high-risk pollutants given new life thanks to weakened, delayed or rescinded regulations, the Environmental Protection Network, a nonprofit, nonpartisan group of hundreds of former Environmental Protection Agency staff, warns that the EPA under President Donald Trump has abandoned the agency’s core mission of protecting people and the environment from preventable toxic exposures.
Former EPA Staff Detail Expanding Pollution Risks Under Trump
Climate Change
Cheniere Energy Received $370 Million IRS Windfall for Using LNG as ‘Alternative’ Fuel
The country’s largest exporter of liquefied natural gas benefited from what critics say is a questionable IRS interpretation of tax credits.
Cheniere Energy, the largest producer and exporter of U.S. liquefied natural gas, received $370 million from the IRS in the first quarter of 2026, a payout that shipping experts, tax specialists and a U.S. senator say the company never should have received.
Cheniere Energy Received $370 Million IRS Windfall for Using LNG as ‘Alternative’ Fuel
-
Greenhouse Gases7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿:满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
