PFS is a certifier of forest permanence until 2100.

PFS certifies proven forestry carbon capture and storage until at least 2100 using unique methodologies and formulae it has developed and protected.

Rigorous standards with second party sustainability assurance

PFS only certifies forests that provably cannot be felled until 2100, will not turn carbon negative until 2100, and where unexpected mortality is provided for. SGS, the world’s leading testing, inspection and certifier, provides second party sustainability assurance.

Foresters seeking certification principally come through Tāmata Hauhā Ltd who PFS has a special relationship with. You are encouraged to visit their website All forests are assessed by two independent regulated registered forestry advisors to ensure compliance with the Platinum Standard and Rules for the Certifying Panel. Only when a project has been approved by them will it be assessed by SGS Australia for sustainability assurance.

PFS will also meet the New Zealand Core Carbon Principles (“NZ-CCP”).

No one else does this.

PFS ensures tangible climate action by certifying permanent and provable carbon sequestration until at least 2100.

About Us

Growing doubts over carbon offsets and standards that prove capture but not long term storage create an urgent need for a new rigorous standard in carbon sequestration for foresters, and a provable means of demonstrating CO2 equivalent to GHGs produced by emitters, will be removed until at least 2100.

The PFS Platinum Standard © enables foresters to prove forests are permanent and genuinely help the planet meet IPCC goals. The standard is a necessary step in giving emitters the means to avoid successful accusations of greenwashing and regulatory breach.

Who’s it For?


Organisations whose activities emit greenhouse gases (GHGs) may need to prove that they are taking high-integrity climate change action, including funding the permanent removal of CO2 from the atmosphere until there are better solutions to global warming factors.


Owners of trees, or those with a legal relationship to a forest, that want to prove measurable additionality, longevity, and transparency in the forest’s provable long-term carbon sequestration.


Investors will be able to access the trading platform run independently of PFS.


A Certificate of Permanent Sequestration certifies that the holder is associated with a forest which is provably sequestering carbon until at least 2100 and thereby provably helping the planet as it strives to meet the IPCC target of no more than 1.5̊ C global warming (above pre-industrial levels) by 2100.

A Permanent Forest Removal Unit can be issued to holders of a Certificate of Permanent Sequestration. This turns a promise not to cut down a forest until 2100 into a saleable derivative without cancelling the promise. PFRU™s can be traded on a private market established by the PFS group.

The mandatory market refers to participation schemes operated by a government. In the mandatory market the government sets the rules and regulates them. The voluntary market refers to any market that is not a mandatory. Such markets define their own rules and succeed if they are embraced by emitters and other stakeholders.

In generic terms units sold in the voluntary market are called VERs (voluntary emission reductions or removals) but this is little more than a label for a what can be widely different bundles of private rights and obligations. PFRU™s are very high integrity removal (of CO2) units.This is explained further on the PFS group interactive website.

No. PFRU™s are not tradeable on the mandatory market and mandatory credits (e.g., NZUs) do not meet the strict requirements for trading on the PFRU™ market.

No. The two systems work differently. Under a mandatory system you surrender NZUs, if you are an emitter, at the end of each year equivalent to your emissions or the NZUs you have in your account, whichever is less.

There is no need to surrender PFRU™s in the private market because there is no limit in how many tonnes of GHG you can emit in any year and no free hand out of emission units to an emitter. Removing CO2 from the atmosphere establishes green credentials and prevents claims of greenwashing if a high integrity standard is used. PFS group does not in believe offsetting removals against obligations to reduce emissions.This is explained further on the PFS group interactive website.

Yes. If you are an emitter, you may be required to participate in the mandatory market but can elect to be a non-emitter in the PFRU™ market. That means you can claim a Certificate of Permanent Sequestration for the trees on your property (assuming you otherwise qualify) and convert those into PFRU™s. You can then sell the PFRU™s on the market to help pay for any costs incurred in buying NZUs on the public market if you are required to. However, the promise not to cut them down before 2100 remains.

Alternatively, if you have more than one forest you may declare yourself an emitter in relation to one (no PFRU™s) but not an emitter in relation to another. This is explained further on the PFS group interactive website.

No. Counting the same sequestration twice for the purpose of valuing the monetarisation of derivatives of two different promises made to different people is not double counting, it is counting twice for different purposes. One count is of forests that have historically sequestered carbon but are allowed to release it back into the atmosphere, the other count is those forests that cannot release it back until at least 2100.This is explained further on the PFS group interactive website.

At present an emitter can represent that it has offset its emissions by buying forestry generated VERs, and providing it can get someone to certify that claim, and the public to buy it, any forest generated emission unit will do.That may no longer be a viable strategy if offsetting claims are discredited. Then an emitter will have to say “I have emitted this much GHG” but “I have sequestered (taken out of the atmosphere) this much CO2”. At this point the quality of the sequestration claim becomes important.This is explained further on the PFS group interactive website.

It is likely to be misleading to claim forestry offsets cancel obligations to reduce emissions because it is impossible to prove. When we think of net afforestation and deforestation as a global issue we cannot know if a planted tree is simply replacing one that has been cut down. If global deforestation exceeds global afforestation, planting trees goes to balance the world’s forestry deficit, not to reduce GHG emissions. Further, even if all the land that will sustain a forest until 2100 is planted, all obligations to reduce emissions will not be offset. This is explained further on the PFS group interactive website.

There will be a natural defence to greenwashing, because all claims made can be proved. Slowing global warming until the IPCC target date of 2100 is necessary to gain certification. Second, there is no concern climate risk disclosure regulations may make auditors reluctant to sign off unprovable claims. Third, consumer and commercial protection regulations, such as Fair-Trading Acts, may soon prohibit unprovable claims. Fourth, unprovable claims may not be accepted by importing nations.

On the other hand, offsetting and other unprovable claims may only be a private lawsuit away from being unlawful. That makes it a risky strategy to rely on such claims. This is explained further on the PFS group interactive website.

This is explained further on the PFS group interactive website or by contacting PFS group through its current website.

In one of two ways. It can plant a forest or buy a forest and possibly qualify for certificates as the forest sequesters carbon. Or it can buy PFRU™s, at which time those PFRU™s will automatically convert to a Certificate of Permanent Sequestration. There are exceptions to automatic conversion allowing an emitter to keep and transfer PFRU™s, such as on winding up or for distribution to customers under a loyalty type scheme for private recording purposes.

This is explained further on the PFS group interactive website or by contacting PFS group through its current website.

Holders of Certificates of Permanent Sequestration can claim environmental credentials; generally, holders of PFRU™s cannot.

This is explained further on the PFS group interactive website or by contacting PFS group through its current website.

No. The PFS group defines the market and after rules of supply and demand apply. Indications are that the voluntary carbon market (VCM) market will be huge whereas the number of forests that will be able to meet the PFS Standard will be limited. For example, one of the requirements of the Standard is political stability in a country to ensure that forests will not be nationalised or subject to illegal logging.The value at which NZUs trade is not related to the PFRU™ market.

The terms of issue of a certificate recognise that a covenant not to fell may be revoked in a number of circumstances, for example if the certifying panel is convinced, at some point in the future, that the global target of not more than 1.5̊ C warming will be achieved by 2100 even if the forest is felled (e.g., if there are some giant steps taken in the field of carbon capture or fusion based energy) or if it becomes illegal to register such a covenant.

Given there is no leakage from the voluntary market into the mandatory market (and vice versa) there is no reason it should. Governments have in the past noted that they might be double counting the same sequestration for their own purposes of reporting their emissions under the Paris Agreement, but this is an accounting design fault of their making and is being corrected after COP26. It has nothing to do with the voluntary market.

Yes. They can make as many promises as they like. But they cannot make exactly the same promises twice. That could lead to Fair Trading Act, reporting and other consequences. 

In some cases, yes.

This is explained further on the PFS group interactive website or by contacting PFS group through its current website.

The NZ government operated a program known as the permanent forest sink initiative (PFSI). If land owners were prepared to covenant not to fell their trees, they received credits for the carbon sequestered, as it was sequestered. In 2020 the program was terminated. The government has proposed a new program (PP89) to come into effect in 2023. This is still in the consultation phase, but the present proposal is two classes of NZUs in the ETS, ordinary and PP89 (not to be felled for 50 years). The saleability (and market price) will be the same whichever are held, but there may be less stringent rules for recognising PP89 forests. The relationship between the ETS, whether or not it includes PP89, and the PFS group will remain as it now is.


PFS ensures tangible climate action by securing permanent and provable carbon sequestration until at least 2100.