A reforestation project developer with a multi-thousand-hectare planting programme had strong on-the-ground data but no independent, comparable rating that a corporate offtaker's procurement team could rely on. Two prior forward purchase discussions had stalled once the counterparty's risk team asked for third-party verification of permanence and additionality.
The developer's baseline documentation was thorough but fragmented across multiple consultants' reports, with no single score that summarised project quality the way a corporate buyer's internal ESG scoring already summarised supplier risk.
SYNE rated the project under the Carbon Ratings methodology, combining satellite-verified planting progress with the project's own MRV documentation and a ground-truth site visit. The rating placed particular weight on permanence risk and the buffer pool allocation, the two areas offtakers had previously flagged as under-documented.
Analysts cross-referenced the project's baseline against comparable reforestation projects already in SYNE's rated universe, giving the developer a relative benchmark alongside the absolute score for the first time.
The project received an AA Carbon Rating, with permanence risk and MRV quality both scoring in the top band of SYNE's forestry coverage. The rating report gave the corporate offtaker's risk committee the independent verification it had been asking for.
A multi-year forward purchase agreement was signed within the following quarter, with the offtaker's procurement lead citing the AA rating as having removed the single biggest blocker from the prior two stalled discussions.
