Removall, the France-based carbon project developer, and Sumitomo Corporation have launched a joint venture called Summit Removall. This venture will co-invest in high-quality, nature-based carbon credit projects globally. It combines Removall’s carbon project development skills with Sumitomo’s strong global presence, especially in Asia. Together, they aim to increase access to premium carbon credits and support climate goals.
This venture will fund and manage certified carbon projects that remove and reduce greenhouse gases. The two companies will also handle the sales of carbon credits to their customers. They will balance their efforts across Europe, Asia, and the Americas.
Yusuke Kinoshita, General Manager of Carbon Solution Business Unit at Sumitomo Corporation, added:
We are thrilled to collaborate with Removall on this significant venture, and we are genuinely excited about what we can achieve together. This partnership aligns perfectly with Sumitomo Corporation’s commitment to sustainability and our goal to contribute to nature-positive and our corporate message ”Enriching Lives and the
World”. By investing in high-quality carbon projects like Mozblue, we are not only supporting ecological restoration but also enhancing our capabilities to deliver impactful environmental solutions on a global scale. We deeply appreciate Removall’s expertise in carbon credits, which will enable us to make an even greater impact”.
Removall is a certified carbon project developer that helps companies and organizations meet their climate goals. They enable them to support, fund, or invest in high-quality carbon projects that deliver real environmental impact.
Flagship Investment: Africa’s Largest Mangrove Restoration Project
Summit Removall’s first big investment is MozBlue Phase 1. This project begins Africa’s largest mangrove restoration project in Mozambique. Developed by Blue Forest and Removall, it aims to restore 5,116 hectares of mangrove forests.
-
MozBlue Phase 1 began operations in November 2024.
-
It expects to generate about 2.5 million tons of blue carbon credits over 40 years.
-
The project will use CCB and VCS VM0033 methods. This will help meet high environmental and social standards.
Mangroves are highly effective carbon sinks. They absorb more CO₂ than tropical forests. They also protect coastlines, support biodiversity, and improve local water quality.
-
In an EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW with Jérôme Beilin, CEO and Co-Founder of Removall, he has shared his valuable insights with CarbonCredits.com
CC: What strategic goals do Removall and Sumitomo Corporation aim to achieve through the creation of Summit Removall?
Jérôme Beilin: Removall and Sumitomo Corporation both aspire to become key carbon markets players in the coming years.
Removall, as a project developer, investor, and carbon credit retailer working with premium corporate end-users, intends to grow its investing capacities thanks to Summit Removall, and develop its commercial presence in Asia.
Thanks to this joint venture, Removall will grow its existing portfolio of 6 projects through a portfolio of 15+ projects in the next couple of years.
Sumitomo Corporation is willing to enter the carbon markets with investments in top-quality, high-integrity, and rare blue carbon projects, as well as securing premium carbon credits for their customers across several industries.
The platform’s goal is to invest in multiple international projects that deliver significant medium- and long-term carbon removal from the atmosphere.
CC: Why was the MozBlue Project in Mozambique chosen as the first investment?
Jérôme Beilin: MozBlue was chosen as the first investment for this Joint Venture between Removall and Sumitomo Corporation for several reasons:
First, this is the 1st phase of the largest mangrove restoration initiative in Africa, with 5 200 hectares to be restored in the 1st phase, but more than 40 000 hectares potential. And we are looking for mangrove restoration at scale.
Second, the project is led by Blue Forest. Blue Forest is a pioneering developer of community-led ecological mangrove restoration projects in Africa and around the world. The UAE-based company specializes in large-scale initiatives and aims to restore natural ecosystems while generating co-benefits for local communities and creating long-term value.
Indeed, the MozBlue project is developed by Removall together with Blue Forest and a very strong consortium of partners such as the Mozambican branch of Eden Reforestation (a US based NGO specialized in ecosystem restoration with a solid expertise on mangrove restoration), Silvestrum (a US based environmental consulting firm having developed the VCS mangrove methodology VM00033), Terra-Firma, and Avante, two Mozambican consulting firms experts in community-based approach and local communities engagement.
CC: What makes mangrove restoration a compelling climate solution?
Jérôme Beilin: Mangroves are among the world’s most effective carbon sinks, playing a crucial role in the fight against climate change. They absorb significantly more CO₂ than tropical forests, making them vital for climate change mitigation. Additionally, mangroves support biodiversity conservation and provide essential benefits to local communities.
Despite their importance, only a small fraction of the approximately 5,400 certified carbon credit projects worldwide focus on mangrove-related carbon sequestration with biodiversity co-benefits.
By investing in Mozambique’s MozBlue Project — the largest mangrove restoration initiative in Africa — Removall and Sumitomo Corporation are helping to expand the supply of rare blue carbon credits.
The MozBlue project will deliver such co-benefits. In addition to supporting the growing global market for decarbonization, these projects will also create employment opportunities for local communities involved in mangrove plantation, improve livelihoods, and contribute to nature-positive efforts such as providing habitats for living creatures and water purification.
CC: How will Summit Removall ensure the integrity and certification of the carbon credits generated from its projects?
Jérôme Beilin: The MozBlue Project is listed under the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS), using the most recent methodology for Blue Carbon Project: the VM0033 (Methodology for Tidal Wetland and Seagrass Restoration v2.1).
As the program shows incredible biodiversity and social impacts, the MozBlue Project will be double certified through an additional CCB certification (Climate, Community and Biodiversity).
This dual certification will establish the project as environmentally and socially responsible, providing transparency and accountability in reporting.
The quality of the project has been thoroughly studied by our expert team and through our risk management process.
Best-in-Class MRV methodology procedures (including remote sensing and field surveys) will be followed and will also be completed through regular field visits by our team. Regarding additionality, the project is developed in a Least Developed Country.
As for the carbon potential of the project, we use very conservative estimations to calculate the carbon credit emissions, including conservative assumptions on the project baseline. The project carbon curve and baselines, as well as the PDD, are done by the world best carbon expert for Blue Carbon projects. Moreover, Blue Forest is taking a very conservative approach on carbon calculations sheets which strengthen the project robustness.
CC: How will local communities in Mozambique benefit from the MozBlue Phase 1 project in terms of employment and ecosystem services?
Jérôme Beilin: In addition to its decisive environmental impact, the first phase of the project will create over 700 direct jobs and multiple indirect jobs, reaching over 50 local communities, representing more than people.
Through an innovative and ambitious benefit-sharing scheme, the project will also fund income-generating community activities such as the cultivation of alternative wood to mangroves, fishing, farming, livestock, and beekeeping.
CC: Looking ahead, what types of carbon removal projects and regions will Summit Removall prioritize for future investments?
Jérôme Beilin: Removall and Sumitomo Corporation are mainly looking for any Nature Based Solutions removal projects as of today. We can also evaluate carbon avoidance projects, especially on clean water access and clean cooking in emerging countries.
As we don’t have geographical restrictions, we are open to any geography. In fact, we are currently evaluating other investment opportunities in Africa, Asia, Latin and Central America.
Why Blue Carbon Projects Matter
Despite their benefits, mangrove restoration projects are rare in the carbon market. Of 5,400 certified carbon credit projects worldwide, only a few focus on mangroves. With increasing demand for blue carbon credits, which relate to ocean-based carbon removal, projects like MozBlue are essential.
By investing in this Mozambique initiative, Removall and Sumitomo Corporation are increasing the limited global supply of blue carbon credits. They are also:
-
Creating local job opportunities
-
Enhancing community livelihoods
-
Supporting endangered species habitats
-
Contributing to nature-positive climate action
- READ MORE: Taiwan Sets Massive Target of 700K-Ton Blue Carbon Reserve by 2030
Scaling Nature-Based Solutions Globally
MozBlue is just the beginning of this climate initiative. Blue Forest aims to restore and protect up to 155,000 hectares of mangroves in Mozambique in the coming years. Future phases will plant native mangrove species. This will help climate and biodiversity in the long term.
Summit Removall, Removall, and Sumitomo Corporation will look for high-quality, nature-based carbon credit investments worldwide. This joint platform will focus on projects that make high-quality carbon removal credits. These credits will be sold to companies in Europe, Asia (like Japan), and the Americas.
Africa’s Growing Role in the Carbon Credit Market
In 2024, the global market produced about 290 million tons of carbon credits. Africa contributed 20%, or 59 million tons. By 2030, Africa could produce as much as 2.4 billion tons of carbon credits each year. This shows significant growth potential.
Thus, Removall and Sumitomo Corporation will work together in this growing market and tap every opportunity to boost the carbon credit market.
The post Removall and Sumitomo Team Up to Expand High-Quality Carbon Credits – EXCLUSIVE Interview with Removall CEO Jérôme Beilin Inside appeared first on Carbon Credits.
The accounting differences that decide whether your nature investment shows up in inventory, in BVCM, or nowhere at all.
The question reaches a procurement team about three weeks before the next sustainability committee meeting. Someone has read about insetting. Someone else has just signed off on an offset purchase. The CSO wants to know if the two are interchangeable. The answer is no, and the GHG Protocol Land Sector and Removals Standard is the reason why.
This article walks through what each term means at audit-grade specificity, what the standards actually say about how each gets counted, and how to decide which tool fits which target. The insetting vs offsetting question is one of the most-searched in corporate climate strategy, and one of the most poorly answered. By the end of this piece, you should be able to brief a committee on the difference without notes.
The two definitions, in plain English
Offsetting means buying carbon credits generated outside your value chain and retiring them against your residual emissions. The reduction happens somewhere else, financed by you, and the credit is the receipt.
Insetting means investing in emission reductions or removals inside your own value chain, typically with suppliers, where the reduction is directly linked to the products and services you buy. The reduction happens inside the boundary of your Scope 3 inventory, and the accounting treatment is fundamentally different.
The shorthand from the University of Oxford’s Nature-based Insetting Initiative is useful: insetting is what you do with the supply chain you have; offsetting is what you do with the supply chain you do not have.
What the GHG Protocol Land Sector Standard actually says
The GHG Protocol Land Sector and Removals Standard, finalised in 2024 after a multi-year pilot, sets the rules for how land-based emission reductions and removals enter corporate inventories. The Standard distinguishes between inventory accounting (Scope 1, 2, and 3) and project or intervention accounting (a separate methodology for crediting).
For insetting, the practical implication is that supplier-level interventions, when properly measured and attributed, can reduce your Scope 3 category 1 (purchased goods and services) emissions in your inventory. The reduction is not a credit retired against the inventory; it is a lower inventory number, period.
For offsetting, the credit is retired separately. It can be reported as a contribution toward a net-zero claim under the SBTi Beyond Value Chain Mitigation framework or as part of a VCMI Carbon Integrity claim, but it does not lower the inventory number.
A practical consequence: if your Science Based Target requires a 50% absolute reduction in Scope 3 emissions by 2030, insetting moves you toward the target. Offsetting does not. This single point of difference reshapes the procurement decision.
When insetting counts toward Scope 3 (and when it does not)
Insetting counts toward Scope 3 only when several conditions are met:
- The intervention must occur with an entity in your value chain.
- The emissions reduction or removal must be measured against a defensible baseline.
- The reduction must be attributed to your share of that supplier’s output, not double-counted with other buyers.
- It must follow the inventory accounting rules in the GHG Protocol Land Sector Standard, not the project accounting rules used to generate credits.
The most common failure mode is double counting. If your supplier sells the same reduction as a credit on the voluntary market and also reports it to you as a Scope 3 reduction, the math breaks. The Standard requires you to address this risk, typically by purchasing and retiring the supplier-issued credit as part of your inventory or by contractual provisions that prevent the supplier from selling the reduction twice.
When insetting does not count toward Scope 3: when the intervention sits with a supplier you do not buy from, when the baseline is not defensible, when the attribution is unclear, or when the documentation does not survive audit. Those cases default to Beyond Value Chain Mitigation, which is still useful but operates on a different ledger.
The procurement and supplier engagement question
Insetting is harder than offsetting. That is the unfashionable truth most buyers eventually confront. Offsetting is a transaction; insetting is a relationship.
To run an insetting program, you need supplier mapping precise enough to know which farms or facilities sit at which Scope 3 boundary. You need an engagement model that gets suppliers to participate, which usually requires multi-year commitments and shared economics. You need an MRV architecture that measures the right things and produces audit-ready documentation. And you need a contractual structure that prevents double counting and protects both sides.
The trade-off you receive in return is significant. Reductions count against your inventory rather than your residual. Supplier relationships deepen, which protects sourcing continuity. Yield and quality improvements often follow regenerative interventions, which reduces your input cost over time. And the regulatory file, under CSRD, CSDDD, EUDR, and the SBTi FLAG Guidance, is materially stronger.
Choosing the right tool for the right target
A practical decision rule. If your target is a science-based Scope 3 reduction and you operate in a FLAG sector or source FLAG commodities, insetting is the structurally correct tool. If your target is a net-zero claim that includes neutralising hard-to-abate residual emissions outside your value chain, BVCM via high-integrity offsets is the structurally correct tool. Most companies with material Scope 3 exposure need both, in different proportions, sequenced over time.
The sequencing matters. Insetting takes longer to stand up but produces a permanent reduction in the inventory. Offsetting can be transacted faster but does not change the inventory and now sits under tighter claim restrictions. Treat them as complementary tools with different jobs, not as substitutes. The Accountability Framework Initiative and the IUCN Global Standard for Nature-based Solutions both provide useful guardrails for the insetting side, with biodiversity, human rights, and benefit-sharing requirements that go beyond carbon math.
If you are mapping a Scope 3 reduction roadmap and need to scope which interventions count toward your inventory versus which sit in Beyond Value Chain Mitigation, the carbon and sustainability experts at Carbon Credit Capital can help you structure a nature-based supply chain investment program that fits your FLAG exposure, your target architecture, and your audit horizon. Schedule a consultation.
Net zero is often described as a balancing act: cut what you can, account for the rest, and reach zero on the ledger. That framing is useful, but it leaves something out. It treats every tonne of carbon as interchangeable and every route to zero as equally sound, while the science tells a more specific story.
Malawi has lost a striking share of its forests over the past three decades. Woodlands that once covered well over a third of the country now cover less than a quarter, and the pressure on what remains is increasing. Behind those figures sit two practical questions: what is driving the loss, and what reverses it?
-
Climate Change1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year 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
-
Renewable Energy10 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits