# If my Verra project uses two methodologies, do I need a separate baseline and additionality test for each?

Canonical: https://senseible.earth/answers/verra-two-methodologies-one-project-separate-baselines

Usually yes. Where more than one methodology is applied, the project proponent sets the baseline and shows additionality for each activity separately. Two exceptions: both methodologies point to the same tools and procedures, or separate showings are not logical or practicable. Results are reported per methodology.

## The rule (Standard, sections 3.5.1 and 3.5.2)

A project may include several activities where the methodology allows it or where more than one methodology is applied. Where more than one is applied, the proponent shall establish baseline scenarios and demonstrate additionality for each project activity separately according to each methodology, unless one of two things applies.

1. The methodologies refer to the same tools and procedures for setting the baseline and showing additionality.
2. It is not logical or practicable to set separate baselines or give separate additionality showings for each activity.

## The example the Standard gives for the second exception

Separate additionality may not be practicable for activities implemented at a single facility, which therefore represent a single investment. For an Indian plant, our reading: a heat recovery unit and a captive solar array put in at one site under one investment decision may fall here, but the verification body decides, and two separate investments at the same plant look more like two activities.

## Reporting follows the methodology (section 3.14.2)

- Reductions and removals are quantified and reported by methodology where more than one is applied.
- They are reported by country where a project spans more than one country.
- Reductions are reported separately from removals where the methodology gives procedures to do so.
- Metric tonnes are the unit, with each gas converted to tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (t CO2e) (3.14.3).

## What to prepare

- A short note per activity: what the baseline would have been, with bills, meter logs and equipment records.
- A clear line in the monitoring plan saying which meter or invoice feeds which methodology, so no kilowatt hour is counted in both.
- Ask the verification body early whether the single facility exception applies to you.

## What Senseible does here

Senseible reads fuel invoices and electricity bills into monthly records that you can keep with your project evidence. Its in-house check is not an accredited third-party verification, and Senseible is not part of Verra's process.

- [How to find the right carbon methodology](https://senseible.earth/answers/how-to-find-the-right-carbon-methodology)
- [Additionality in carbon credits](https://senseible.earth/answers/what-is-additionality-in-carbon-credits)
- [Verra project fragments: six conditions](https://senseible.earth/answers/verra-project-fragment-six-conditions)
- [Carbon credits](https://senseible.earth/carbon-credits)

Sources: [Verra, VCS Standard v5.0 (16 December 2025)](https://verra.org/documents/vcs-standard-v5-0/)

Last reviewed 2026-11-05. Check the current VCS Standard, Registration and Issuance Process and Program Guide on Verra's site before you rely on this; Verra updates them periodically.