RUSSIAN GAS PIPELINE PROJECTS: CASE STUDY OF THE DOMINANT PROJECT TYPE

The document examines the prevalence of gas pipeline refurbishment projects in Russia's Joint Implementation (JI) portfolio, which account for 53% of submitted projects. It analyzes the technical process of reducing methane leaks, the complex institutional structure of Russian gas distribution involving Gazprom and regional companies, and the debate over whether these projects are 'additional' or would have occurred due to economic incentives. The authors argue that while the projects are technically viable and potentially profitable, institutional barriers and a lack of historical leakage data complicate the verification of emission reductions.

• Gas pipeline refurbishment projects are the most prominent project type in the Russian JI portfolio submitted to the JI Supervisory Committee (JISC) under Track 2, representing 53% or 58.7 Mt of projected emission reductions.
• The Stavropol project is exceptionally large, projected to reduce emissions by 25 Mt during the first commitment period, which constitutes over 40% of the total reductions for its project type and approximately 22% of the entire Russian JI portfolio.
• Technical implementation involves using Heath Hi-Low Samplers to detect methane leaks and Gore-Tex Joint Sealant for repairs, replacing traditional asbestos.
• There is a critical lack of historical data on methane leakages from low-pressure distribution pipelines, which creates risks for baseline setting and may allow projects to be credited for more reductions than they actually deliver.
• The institutional structure of gas distribution has shifted toward Gazprom's control; by 2007, Gazpromregiongaz held interests in 197 of approximately 300 regional distribution organizations.
• Conversely, critics argue that these projects may not be additional because saving gas is economically rational, and the high global warming potential of methane provides a perverse incentive for distributors to neglect maintenance to maximize future carbon credits.
• The authors conclude that while the current institutional setup supports the case for additionality, this is likely a temporary state as domestic gas prices rise and the pace of institutional change remains uncertain.

APA

Korppoo, A., & Moe, A. (2008). RUSSIAN GAS PIPELINE PROJECTS: CASE STUDY OF THE DOMINANT PROJECT TYPE. Climate Strategies. https://climatestrategies.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/1-gas-paper-final-draft.pdf

Chicago

Korppoo, Anna, and Arild Moe. RUSSIAN GAS PIPELINE PROJECTS: CASE STUDY OF THE DOMINANT PROJECT TYPE. Climate Strategies, 2008. https://climatestrategies.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/1-gas-paper-final-draft.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Korppoo |first1=Anna |last2=Moe |first2=Arild |title=RUSSIAN GAS PIPELINE PROJECTS: CASE STUDY OF THE DOMINANT PROJECT TYPE |publisher=Climate Strategies |date=29 February 2008 |url=https://climatestrategies.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/1-gas-paper-final-draft.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{korppoo2008russian, author = {Korppoo, Anna and Moe, Arild}, title = {{RUSSIAN GAS PIPELINE PROJECTS: CASE STUDY OF THE DOMINANT PROJECT TYPE}}, institution = {Climate Strategies}, year = {2008}, month = feb, url = {https://climatestrategies.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/1-gas-paper-final-draft.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }