FAQ

Green power comes from renewable sources such as solar, wind, hydro, biomass, and geothermal. At GREENET, we emphasize quality green power and the principles of the circular economy. We prioritize projects involving agrivoltaics, aquavoltaics, and regional revitalization—aligning with global ESG and CSR values while minimizing environmental impact.

Renewable Energy Certificates (T-RECs) are issued and managed by the National Renewable Energy Certification Center (T-REC), under the Bureau of Standards, Metrology and Inspection. T-RECs serve as proof of green power usage. One certificate is issued for every 1,000 kWh consumed. Certificates are typically issued monthly; any shortfall is rolled over.

．Smart meter installation: Within 10 business days after approval
．Taipower data review: After the meter is installed, your information will be submitted to Taipower for verification. The review process typically takes 2 to 4 months, depending on the number of electricity accounts involved.

Yes. Taiwan’s T-RECs have been recognized by major global organizations, including the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), RE100, and the Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT)—making them a credible instrument for ESG declarations on the international stage.

No. All green power supplied through GREENET is transmitted via the Taipower grid, ensuring stable and uninterrupted delivery. The use of green power does not affect the reliability or quality of your electricity supply.

Green power consumption is measured using smart meters installed by Taipower at both your usage site and the associated power plant. Data is recorded every 15 minutes. Monthly settlement is based on the matching of generation and usage during each time interval—ensuring precise accounting of your green electricity usage.

After purchasing green power, Taipower will install an Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) device at your location. Your electricity bill will then follow TOU pricing. Taipower offers two-tier and three-tier TOU structures for residential and commercial users:
Off-peak hours are typically from 10:30 p.m. to 7:30 a.m. on weekdays, and all day on weekends. The three-tier plan introduces an additional mid-peak period during weekday lunch and evening hours. Electricity rates vary depending on whether usage occurs during peak, mid-peak, or off-peak hours.

If the electricity account is under your name, you may directly purchase green power without notifying your landlord. If the electricity account is under your landlord’s name, this is known as a “single account, multiple users” model. In this case, a tripartite agreement must be signed between the buyer, the electricity retailer, and the landlord before green power procurement can proceed. In the single-account model, T-RECs will be issued quarterly or annually, depending on the agreement.

GREENET will issue a monthly green power invoice along with a Taipower wheeling statement to each buyer. Users are required to complete payment based on the amount indicated on the GREENET invoice.

In addition to electricity charges, users must pay: A T-REC certification center service fee of NT$0.0005 per kWh (pre-tax). A Taipower wheeling fee, based on Taipower’s annual public rate schedule.

Yes. A T-REC certification center verification fee of NT$5,000 (pre-tax) is required per project. This is a one-time fee, with a re-verification required every three years.

The carbon trading market is divided into the voluntary market and the compliance market, and carbon credits are defined differently within each and are not interchangeable.

In the voluntary carbon market, a carbon credit represents a verified unit of emission reduction resulting from a completed carbon reduction project. Each unit of carbon credit represents the reduction of one metric ton of carbon dioxide (tCO₂e) emissions, with its price determined by market mechanisms. These credits allow companies to offset unavoidable emissions while supporting project developers and creating financial incentives for broader decarbonization efforts.

In the compliance market (under cap-and-trade schemes), a carbon allowance is a government-issued permit allowing a company to emit a specified amount of CO₂e. Each allowance represents the right to emit one metric ton of carbon dioxide (tCO₂e). The total number of allowances is capped and regulated by the government, and the market price is determined through auctions. Within this system, companies that exceed their allocated emission limits must purchase additional allowances, while those that emit less than their allowance can sell their surplus credits on the market.

Carbon neutrality means that an organization’s total carbon emissions or carbon footprint is effectively reduced to zero. However, very few businesses can completely eliminate the greenhouse gas emissions generated by their operations. Even with the adoption of energy-efficient equipment or renewable energy, most companies can only reduce emissions within Scope 1 and Scope 2. To achieve carbon neutrality, organizations must rely on external emission reduction efforts—namely, by purchasing carbon credits to offset residual emissions.

According to Time magazine, companies that purchase carbon credits are 3.4 times more likely to meet their Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) goals compared to those that do not. Furthermore, these companies also invest three times more in carbon reduction activities than their counterparts. However, if a company’s carbon neutrality claims rely solely on carbon credits—especially if they purchase large volumes of low-quality or ineffective credits—it may face public backlash and accusations of greenwashing.

In this light, purchasing carbon credits should be seen as a declaration of a company’s commitment to decarbonization. Carbon credits offer a cost-effective means of offsetting emissions across Scopes 1, 2, and 3. However, if a company fails to conduct proper due diligence, and instead solely relies on carbon credits as its decarbonization strategy or purchasing credits of questionable integrity, it risks undermining its credibility and damaging its brand image.

To avoid accusations of greenwashing, companies should evaluate the quality of carbon credits based on the following five key criteria:
(1) Additionality: The emission reductions must be the result of actions that go beyond regulatory requirements or cost-saving measures. If a project would have happened anyway, it does not qualify.
(2) Permanence: The carbon reductions must be long-lasting and irreversible.
(3) No Overestimation: Project developers should conservatively estimate the carbon reduction impact. This includes avoiding inflated baseline scenarios or underestimating emissions from the project itself.
(4) No Double Counting: Carbon credits must be uniquely issued and retired. The same reduction cannot be claimed by multiple parties or used for multiple offsetting purposes.
(5) No Harm to Communities or Ecosystems: Projects should consider and mitigate any adverse social or environmental impacts. This includes selecting native species for reforestation to preserve biodiversity, and ensuring renewable energy installations do not disrupt local communities.

At GREENET, our expert team rigorously screens carbon credits based on these stringent standards. We tailor our recommendations to your budget and decarbonization goals, all to help you craft a credible, impactful strategy toward carbon neutrality. Let us be your trusted partner on the path to a sustainable future.

Carbon credit projects can generally be categorized based on their underlying carbon reduction principles into two main types:
(1) Carbon Removal: These projects remove carbon dioxide directly from the atmosphere. Common examples include afforestation/reforestation, chemical carbon removal processes, and Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCUS).
(2) Avoided Emissions: These projects prevent future emissions of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Common examples include renewable energy development, REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation), energy efficiency upgrades, and replacement of high-energy-consuming appliances.

Carbon removal credits typically demonstrate stronger mitigation results but come at a higher cost. Enterprises are encouraged to select carbon credits aligned with their budget and sustainability goals.

Common types of carbon credit projects include:
(1) Agriculture, Forestry, and Other Land Use Projects (AFOLU)
． These encompass all projects related to natural carbon sinks and environmental land management.
． AFOLU projects can be further categorized based on the type of natural carbon sink into blue carbon (ocean), brown carbon (soil), and green carbon (forest), all of which have the function of absorbing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
． Forest-related carbon credits such as REDD+ and Improved Forest Management (IFM) focus on preserving or enhancing forest carbon stocks and are typically classified under avoided emissions.
(2) Renewable Energy Projects
． Solar power, wind power, biomass energy, geothermal energy, biogas
(3) Household Appliances and Community Projects
． Clean cookstoves, clean water
(4) Energy Efficiency Improvement Projects
． Replacement of lighting equipment, chiller systems
(5) Chemical and Technological Carbon Reduction Projects
． Carbon reduction based on chemical principles, carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies

Carbon credit vintage refers to the year in which the carbon was removed from or reduced in the atmosphere. Since the carbon reduction activity has already taken place, there is no issue of expiration.

Project developers typically verify the project every three to four years. After each successful verification, new vintage carbon credits are issued, so it is common for the same project to have multiple vintages.

In addition, carbon credits must go through at least one year of verification before issuance, so older vintage credits may have only recently become available for sale. Project developers may also choose to release different vintages at the same time based on market price considerations.

Although vintage does not affect the environmental impact of carbon credits, older vintages may have used older methodologies, which may be less rigorous than newer ones. As a result, they are usually priced lower. This is also why carbon exchanges typically only allow carbon credits issued within the past five years to be listed.