Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

Carbon Market Watch urges the CMA to provide additional guidance to the Article 6.4 Supervisory Body to ensure that standards for removals and methodologies are science-based and transparent. Key recommendations include mandating independent third-party reviews every five years starting in 2028, establishing a maximum risk threshold for project eligibility based on science, and ensuring that performance-based additionality tests are as stringent as financial additionality tests.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • Carbon Market Watch recommends that the Supervisory Body and Methodology Expert Panel (MEP) align with scientific expertise when operationalising work on removals and methodological requirements, and that an independent third party conduct a regular review of registered activities' compliance every five years starting in 2028.
  • Regarding removals, the document proposes requiring a minimum post-crediting monitoring period based on the lifetime of CO2 in the atmosphere and the development of a science-based, conservative risk assessment tool to determine if reversal risk is "negligible".
  • The organization argues for the establishment of a maximum risk threshold for project eligibility to exclude activities with excessive reversal risk, regardless of buffer credits, and calls for rigorous consequences for participants who fail to replenish the Buffer Pool after avoidable reversals, including exclusion from future Article 6.4 activities.
  • For methodologies, Carbon Market Watch recommends that any exceptions to downward baseline adjustments be strictly based on peer-reviewed science and that performance-based additionality approaches be at least as stringent as financial additionality tests.

Cite the original document

APA
Carbon Market Watch (n.d.). CMW recommendations on CMA further guidance to 6.4SBM. https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/CMW-recommendations-on-CMA-further-guidance-to-6.4SBM.pdf
Chicago
Carbon Market Watch. CMW recommendations on CMA further guidance to 6.4SBM. n.d. https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/CMW-recommendations-on-CMA-further-guidance-to-6.4SBM.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite press release |author=Carbon Market Watch |title=CMW recommendations on CMA further guidance to 6.4SBM |url=https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/CMW-recommendations-on-CMA-further-guidance-to-6.4SBM.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@misc{carbonmarketwatchndcmw, author = {{Carbon Market Watch}}, title = {{CMW recommendations on CMA further guidance to 6.4SBM}}, publisher = {Carbon Market Watch}, url = {https://carbonmarketwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/CMW-recommendations-on-CMA-further-guidance-to-6.4SBM.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated