Search Climate Insights Directory

The study finds that approximately 75% of Joint Implementation (JI) offsets likely did not represent additional emission reductions, potentially increasing global GHG emissions by 600 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent. The analysis highlights systemic failures in additionality testing, the prevalence of retroactive crediting, and the lack of international oversight in Track 1 projects, particularly in countries with significant Assigned Amount Unit (AAU) surpluses like Russia and Ukraine.

The paper finds that CDM nitric acid projects have successfully fostered abatement in a sector that previously lacked such practices, with limited risk of carbon leakage and no evidence of systematic baseline manipulation. However, it highlights significant variability in baseline emissions between plants and monitoring periods, and notes substantial delays in credit issuance, particularly for projects using secondary abatement (AM0034). The authors recommend transitioning to a common benchmarking approach for baseline emissions to simplify methodologies, reduce transaction costs, and ensure environmental integrity.

The research finds that while the CDM successfully drove N2O abatement efficiencies to 98-100%, it created significant competitive advantages for registered plants. This led to carbon leakage during 2008 and 2009, where production shifted from plants in industrialized countries or those with existing abatement to CDM plants. The authors estimate that approximately 13.5 MtCO2e of issued CERs for 2008 and 2009 did not represent real emission reductions. To mitigate this, the paper recommends implementing ambitious baseline emission benchmarks in the CDM methodology.