I talked to different people internally and finally I have an answer for you.

We're excited about the effort being spent on offset quality and would welcome standards that address double counting, additionality, and other quality issues. However, it's not yet clear if the latest draft of Green-e’s protocol for renewable energy has been able to do that.

Moreover, we couldn't agree more about the need for policy solutions that bring into the mix not just renewables, but all verified reductions. We think the best way to do this is a national cap and trade system with the appropriate financial incentives and quality assurance measures. Once this type of system is in place, the number of offset projects will soar – vastly increasing our ability to quickly and cost-effectively address global warming.

Sorry about how long it's taking to get back to you on this. I was on vacation when you posted your question, and since then I've been talking to various people here about it. I will eventually post an answer!

I was wondering what your thoughts were on the new Green-e GHG protocol that addresses the double counting and additionality issues from domestic renewables?

Its seems a shame that of four projects two are LFG and two are digesters. We obviously need policy solutions to bring renewables into the mix as well.