If you are hearing about MRV for the first time, it may sound like the name of a device or certification. But the MRV I explain in Chapter 7 of Technology and Solutions for Demonstrating Carbon Reduction is a process that connects measurement, reporting, and verification. It means creating data, documenting how the result was calculated, and checking whether the claim meets the applicable criteria. Today, let’s look at the questions each step answers.
A distinction to make first as you read the book
The output of measurement includes not just values, but also the information needed to interpret them. That means recording the location and time basis, equipment condition, and any missing periods. At the reporting stage, explain which rules were applied to calculate the result. When reviewing it, check whether you can retrace the calculation. However, reproducing the same result does not by itself establish that the inputs were appropriate. Also check whether the data and methods used fit the purpose.
MRV is a system that connects Measurement, Reporting, and Verification. It attaches calculation methods and conditions of application to results estimated from observations and activity records, then checks the claim against established criteria. Checks used for internal management have different purposes and requirements from verification required for external submission. First decide who will use the results and for what decision; then you can design the necessary evidence and verification process.
Measurement produces data, reporting documents the calculations and interpretation, and verification checks a claim against established criteria. These functions and responsibilities should be distinguished, but it is not necessary for three different organizations to carry them out in every MRV system. The same organization may handle measurement and reporting, while the impartiality and competence of verification, and conflict-of-interest controls, should meet the level required by the applicable standard and scheme.
Measurement (M) produces data. Decide what to observe, where, how often, and with which equipment, then carry it out. The outputs are raw data and the metadata needed to interpret them, such as calibration history, equipment specifications, installation conditions, and missing periods.
Verification (V) is the assessment of a greenhouse gas claim and its supporting evidence against established criteria. ISO 14064-3:2019 can be used for first-, second-, and third-party verification and validation. So we should neither dismiss all verification just because it was conducted internally, nor assume independence just because an external organization took part. Check the verifier’s competence and impartiality, working relationships, and applicable requirements.
First-party verification is performed by the party responsible for the claim; second-party verification is performed by an interested party, such as a buyer; and third-party verification is performed by an independent party. Do not confuse these categories with whether the work was outsourced. A counterparty’s or consulting firm’s title alone does not establish that it qualifies as a third party.
Function checks. A bump test on a safety gas detector introduces gas to check sensor response and alarm functions; it does not replace quantitative calibration. For a research methane analyzer, perform checks suited to its purpose, such as zero and span checks, leak checks, and recovery tests following the manufacturer’s procedures. Passing a function check does not, by itself, guarantee the accuracy of emissions measurement.
What to look for in the field
Imagine a sensor operator handing over sensor data. The person writing the report needs to know the installation conditions, calibration history, and missing periods. The reviewer needs to be able to assess the results using those data and the processing rules. If only the numbers are copied into the final table, necessary explanations may be missing along the way.
Quantifying reductions requires both measurement traceability and traceability of the calculations. Link measurements to a documented calibration chain and uncertainty, and trace activity data, emission factors, and models through their sources, versions, and conditions of application to the final result. Not every reduction figure comes from direct measurement alone. Along with checking whether calculations can be reproduced, reviewers should confirm that the data and methods used are appropriate for the claim.
Concentration is the proportion of a gas in air, while an emissions rate is the mass emitted per unit of time. To measure or estimate emissions, connect concentration with flow rate and a measurement model suited to the purpose. Even if concentration falls, an increase in air movement means you cannot conclude that the mass emissions rate changed in the same direction. When converting emissions rates over time into total emissions, you also need to account for the measurement period and how missing intervals are handled.
Questions to ask in an investment review
Institutions and investors should ask who is responsible for which tasks. The same organization can perform measurement and reporting. But if verification must be independent, check relationships and conflicts of interest against the applicable criteria. Having three departments with different names does not settle the question.
When comparing sensors, examine measurement range and resolution, cross-sensitivity to other gases, response time, and drift together. Also review environmental conditions such as temperature, humidity, and dust, along with calibration requirements. If the purpose requires distinguishing small concentration differences, check whether the device’s display units and uncertainty are fit for that purpose for each product and operating mode. The name of a sensor principle alone cannot substitute for these conditions.
AI can be used to identify candidate anomalies, estimate short missing intervals under defined conditions, and explore relationships among multiple variables. It can also help organize data, perform quality checks, and draft reports. The purpose and cost of failure differ across these functions, so do not assess them all using the same performance metric. Disclose the inputs and assumptions used to produce a result, and distinguish estimates from directly observed values.
A question to leave with before closing the book
If you wait until measurement is complete to think about verification, it may be difficult to recover the records you need. Decide first what you need to explain, then design the links among data, calculations, and review. Understanding the structure of MRV also makes it easier to find the questions missing from a report.
About the author
Bongjun Lee graduated from the Graduate School of Management of Technology (MOT) at Sogang University. He spent seven years at Infitron Co., Ltd. and 20 years at Honeywell, working for a total of 27 years in gas measurement in service engineering, technical sales, and channel management. He is now the founder of AI Safety Korea Co., Ltd., where he is researching livestock methane monitoring and measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV) systems using sensors, AI, and data analytics.