After the previous article on Penghu's biochar coral restoration bricks was published, the question the Editor received most often wasn't about how well the corals were growing — it was: "How exactly was that carbon sink calculated?" This article is here to explain it clearly. The batch of restoration bricks deployed at Hang Bay in Penghu by the Shin Kong Life Foundation, Taiwan Shin Kong Security, TCHAR, and BlueTrend has received the world's first international carbon removal certification for a coral restoration project, with a net carbon sink of 0.313 tonnes of CO₂ equivalent. Here's the key point: that number isn't huge, but the verification process it went through is very different from the voluntary carbon reduction model that most people in Taiwan are familiar with. The Editor will use this pilot project to help you understand what carbon sequestration is, how Taiwan's voluntary carbon reduction differs from international carbon removal certification, and why this path seems worth continuing to explore.
First: What Is a "Carbon Sink"? Not All "Carbon Reduction" Is the Same
A Carbon Sink Is the Earth's "Carbon Vault"
The term "carbon sink" has been coming up a lot lately, but it's easy to get confused about what it actually means. The Editor will try to explain it in the most straightforward way possible: a carbon sink is a "carbon vault" that absorbs carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and locks it away. Forests, oceans, and soil are all natural carbon sinks — plants absorbing carbon through photosynthesis is the most classic example of carbon storage in action.
The problem is, having a vault isn't enough. You also have to prove that "carbon actually went in — and isn't going to quietly leak back out." Only then does that carbon account truly count. This is the most critical part of the whole story, and it will make a lot more sense when we get to the verification process.
Emissions Reduction and Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) Are Not the Same Thing
There's a concept that a lot of people mix up, and the Editor wants to help you sort it out first. There are actually two very different approaches to addressing carbon.
The first is called "emissions reduction" — reducing or avoiding emissions. If you replace old machinery with energy-efficient equipment or switch to solar power generation, the carbon that would have been released simply isn't released. That's emitting less. The second is called "carbon removal," or Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) — actually pulling carbon dioxide that is already floating in the atmosphere back down and storing it long-term. The former is "producing less waste," while the latter is "picking up the waste that's already been thrown out." They are two completely different things. Biochar is listed by the United Nations IPCC as one of the CDR technologies with significant potential, because it can take the carbon that plants have absorbed and lock it into a stable solid form for hundreds of years.
How Does Taiwan's Common Voluntary Carbon Reduction Differ from International Carbon Removal Certification?
Now that we've distinguished between emissions reduction and carbon removal, this section is the core of the article. The "carbon credits" and "voluntary reduction" that people in Taiwan hear about most often, and the "international carbon removal certification" that the Penghu brick received, are actually two quite different systems.
Taiwan's Voluntary Reduction: Mostly "Emitting Less," Registered Domestically
Taiwan is currently operating under a carbon fee–first approach, paired with the Ministry of Environment's "Voluntary Reduction Projects." Simply put, a company proposes its own carbon reduction project — for example, upgrading to energy-efficient equipment, afforestation, or installing renewable energy — and submits it to the Ministry of Environment for review. Once approved, it receives "reduction credits," commonly referred to as carbon credits, which can be registered domestically and traded on the Taiwan Carbon Solution Exchange.
This mechanism is important, but have you noticed? The reduction credits currently issued in Taiwan are predominantly of the "emissions reduction" type, and domestic methodologies for natural carbon sinks are still in their early stages. Furthermore, it operates under domestic rules, primarily applicable to domestic carbon fee offsets and ESG disclosures — international buyers don't necessarily recognise it.
Biochar Carbon Sequestration: Internationally Certified "Permanent Carbon Removal"
The Penghu brick took a different path. The biochar used passed EBC — the European Biochar Certificate — managed by Carbon Standards International (CSI) in Switzerland. TCHAR is the first and currently the only biochar manufacturer in Taiwan to hold EBC certification.
After passing EBC, this batch of biochar was assessed according to the Global Biochar C-Sink international standard to calculate net carbon removal, and then registered in the Global C-Sink Registry. In other words, this is a "permanent carbon removal" credit recognised by international voluntary carbon markets — not a domestic version. Just how much weight does the international community give to biochar? According to CDR.fyi statistics, approximately 87% of removal-type carbon credits on the voluntary carbon market currently come from biochar, which shows how highly regarded it is in the carbon removal field.
One Sentence to Tell Them Apart: Voluntary Reduction vs. Carbon Removal
If you only want to remember one thing, here's the Editor's summary: Taiwan's common voluntary carbon reduction is mostly "emit less, register domestically." The international carbon removal certification that the Penghu brick received is "pull carbon back, register internationally, store it permanently." One proves that you produced less carbon; the other proves that you actually put carbon into a vault. The credibility and international recognition are not the same. This is also why this pilot project — despite its modest carbon sink volume — still carries significant meaning in the Editor's view.
How Was the Carbon Sink of These Restoration Bricks Verified? The Full Process of the Penghu Pilot Project
After all that talk about standards, you're probably wondering: in practice, how was that 0.313 tonnes of carbon sink verified, step by step? The Editor breaks down the full process for you.
Starting with EBC-Certified Biochar
The first step happens on land. Biomass feedstocks — such as wood, bamboo, and agricultural or forestry residues — are placed in an oxygen-deprived, high-temperature environment and thermally pyrolyzed to produce stable biochar. This biochar must first pass EBC certification, confirming that both the production process and the carbon content meet the required standards. The biochar is then mixed into low-carbon cement to form the coral restoration bricks. The team also went through repeated adjustments of the biochar particle size, mixing ratio, and formula to ensure the bricks could withstand the high salinity, high corrosivity, and long-term water currents of the marine environment.
dMRV Digital Monitoring: Making Every Data Point Traceable
Once the bricks are deployed underwater, the main event is monitoring. This project introduced dMRV — digital Measurement, Reporting, and Verification. It automates and streamlines the collection and uploading of underwater monitoring data as much as possible in real time, with the goal of making every data point transparent and traceable. Anyone who wants to check can check — it's not just a matter of taking the team's word for it.
The Editor thinks dMRV is a critical part of this process. The biggest risk with carbon sinks is self-reporting — claiming to have sequestered carbon without external scrutiny. The only way this carbon account holds up is to lay the data out in the open and submit it to third-party standard verification.
Calculating 0.313 Tonnes and Registering in the Global C-Sink Registry
In the final step, following the Global Biochar C-Sink methodology, the actual amount of carbon sequestered by this batch of bricks was calculated, yielding approximately 0.313 tonnes of CO₂ equivalent in net carbon removal, and the result was registered in the Global C-Sink Registry. From a handful of char on land, to a brick on the seafloor, to a carbon sink record in a registration system — the full chain had been completed. It's also worth noting that these bricks have been tested under real ocean conditions and their structural integrity remains intact, proving that the biochar composite material can genuinely hold up in a marine environment.
The Honest Truth About 0.313 Tonnes: The Volume Isn't High, But the Editor Thinks This Path Is Worth Taking
The Editor wants to be straightforward here: 0.313 tonnes of carbon sequestration isn't a lot. To put it in perspective, it's roughly equivalent to the amount emitted by a petrol-powered compact car driving about a thousand-plus kilometres — one lap around the main island of Taiwan. At this stage, it's not yet possible to make money from this brick's carbon sink or build a business around it.
So where does the value of this pilot project lie? The Editor believes it lies in "proving that the method works." This is the world's first coral restoration case that has gone from land into the ocean and obtained international carbon removal certification. It shows us that biochar can do more than be buried in the ground — it can also go into the sea and become a home for coral, while at the same time running a full, measurable, reportable, and verifiable process through a real marine environment. A pilot project isn't about scaling up volume — it's about verifying whether the path is viable. You have to chart the route first before the volume can be scaled up over time. The Editor believes that being willing to honestly acknowledge "the volume isn't high" while still rigorously completing every step of the verification is itself something worth doing.
Next Steps: Connecting Carbon Sequestration with Sustainable Tourism and Biodiversity Credits
If it's not possible to quickly scale up carbon sink volume in the short term, where does this project go from here? The Editor believes the key isn't to scale up carbon sinks alone — it's to connect them with two other tracks so that the value compounds.
Sustainable Tourism: Dive One Tank, Spend a Day as a Citizen Scientist
The first track is sustainable tourism. Starting in 2026, with support from the Shin Kong Life Foundation, BlueTrend and local dive shops are transforming the Hang Bay restoration site into a live venue for "sustainable resilience tourism." Visitors who come to dive don't need to be scientists — as long as they can dive and take photos, they can follow the dive guide and help document coral growth patterns, turning underwater observations into real scientific data. The Editor's team also designed a coral growth pattern identification card set, making the reporting process feel as intuitive and engaging as completing a mission.
Biodiversity Credits: The Next Piece of the Puzzle the Editor Is Exploring
The second track is "biodiversity credits" — something the Editor's team is working to advance, though it is still being explored. To be clear: this mechanism is still in the process of establishing international rules, and the Editor's team is still researching how to connect to it. No one can issue these credits directly at this stage, and this article is not announcing that we are ready to sell them.
But the direction is clear. When the coral biodiversity documented by divers — and the fish populations that return to inhabit the area — can each be converted into verifiable data, there will eventually be an opportunity to link those ecological contributions to a biodiversity credit mechanism. Carbon sinks address "carbon"; biodiversity credits address "the diversity of life." The two happen to fill each other's blind spots. By combining carbon sinks, sustainable tourism, and biodiversity credits into a single package, companies will have a long-term reason to direct ESG resources into the project, and coral restoration won't simply stall after one round of funding runs out.
Conclusion: Carbon Sequestration Is Just the Starting Point — the Editor Is Testing a Whole New Set of Possibilities
Returning to the question at the beginning: how exactly is a carbon sink calculated? The answer is that it takes a complete set of international standards, third-party certification, and dMRV digital monitoring to verify, step by step, the fact of carbon sequestration — and that is precisely the biggest difference between Taiwan's voluntary carbon reduction and international carbon removal certification.
The carbon sink volume of the Penghu pilot project is not large, and the Editor will not overstate its results. But what it is truly doing is bringing biochar from land into the ocean, running a fully verifiable carbon removal process through a real marine environment, and then trying to connect it with sustainable tourism and the still-developing biodiversity credit mechanism. This path has only just begun. Whether the volume will scale up and whether the mechanism can take shape are things the Editor is still watching closely. But being willing to try honestly and to carry out verification with rigor is, in itself, something worth doing.
Further Reading
Related Links
- Organiser: Shin Kong Life Foundation
- Biochar provider: TCHAR
- Local partner dive shop: Ocean Channel
References
- EBC (2012–2025), European Biochar Certificate – Guidelines for a Sustainable Production of Biochar, Carbon Standards International (CSI), Switzerland, Version 10.5E, 14 August 2025.
- Global Biochar C-Sink Standard & Global C-Sink Registry Documentation.
- IPCC, Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change, Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) Pathways.
- Economic Daily News, "Shin Kong Life Foundation Promotes Ocean Conservation — World's First Biochar Coral Restoration Brick Deployed in Penghu," 5 June 2026, money.udn.com.
- K. Chowdhury, S. Basu, M. Pramanik & T. Pleninger, "Blue infrastructure as nature-based solutions for urban sustainability: Evaluating local perceptions from four Indian megacities", Nature-Based Solutions, Volume 7, June 2025, sciencedirect.com. Explores the role of blue infrastructure in ecological restoration, climate resilience, and sustainable development, providing a theoretical basis for the integrated application of marine restoration and natural carbon removal.
(This article is adapted from a TCHAR press release, with additional explanatory content on carbon sinks and carbon removal certification provided by BlueTrend.)
