As the voluntary carbon market continues to mature, credibility, transparency, and scientific rigor remain essential to ensuring climate claims stand up to scrutiny.

The Oil and Gas Minerals Remain In Place (OGMRIP) methodology, developed and governed by the M6 Foundation, establishes a structured, science-based framework for quantifying greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions avoided when economically viable oil and gas resources are legally preserved in situ rather than developed.

A Methodology Built on Engineering and Governance

OGMRIP is designed as a voluntary hydrocarbon production avoidance methodology that applies established engineering, lifecycle assessment, and governance principles to a historically underaddressed supply-side climate lever. The methodology requires:

• A credible baseline scenario reflecting technically and economically viable oil and gas development that would reasonably be expected to occur absent the project.
• Resource classification and quantification aligned with the United Nations Framework Classification for Resources (UNFC-2019), supported by reservoir engineering analysis.
• Lifecycle emissions accounting using the Oil Climate Index Plus Gas (OCI+) model to capture Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions across upstream, midstream, and downstream activities.
• Conservative deductions and leakage accounting to avoid over crediting and reflect real-world market dynamics.
• Legally binding restrictive covenants that prohibit extraction for a minimum of 100 years, coupled with defined crediting periods, monitoring requirements, and periodic re-validation.

Governance and Quality Assurance

A defining feature of the OGMRIP methodology is its emphasis on governance. The M6 Foundation serves as the governing body, issuing single use licenses for validated projects and overseeing ongoing compliance, monitoring, and five-year reassessments. Independent validation and verification bodies operate in alignment with ISO 140642 and ISO 14065 standards, reinforcing transparency and methodological integrity.

Verdantas’ Technical Contribution

Verdantas’ team, Matthew Neiman, Chelsea Anderson, Gina Tonn, and Mark Nulton contributed technical review and practical engineering input to strengthen the robustness and real-world applicability of the methodology. This work focused on areas such as baseline scenario logic, emissions accounting, leakage treatment, conservatism, and quality assurance—helping ensure the methodology is both technically defensible and operationally implementable. Verdantas is recognized as a contributor to the methodology, and Gina Tonn serves on the M6 Foundation Board. By advancing rigorous, conservative, and transparent approaches to carbon avoidance, the M6 Foundation and Verdantas partnership contributes to the broader evolution of credible climate solutions—grounded in engineering judgment and accountable governance.