Search Climate Insights Directory

The research examines how increasing the EU's 2020 emission reduction target beyond 20% interacts with energy security in Poland, the Czech Republic, and Latvia. It distinguishes between 'objective' energy security (quantifiable parameters) and 'subjective' energy security (political discourse), finding that these often diverge. The authors argue that more stringent targets could improve energy security by reducing import dependency through renewables and energy efficiency, and by providing a clearer policy framework to avoid 'suboptimal investment' and 'stranded assets' in technologies like nuclear and carbon capture and storage (CCS). While Poland and the Czech Republic express high subjective insecurity despite relatively stable objective positions, Latvia remains objectively vulnerable due to its high reliance on Russian imports, though it possesses significant renewable potential.

The paper argues that Sectoral Approaches (SAs)—which the author suggests renaming to Sectoral Approaches, Agreements and Measures (SAAMs)—are most viable when designed as domestic policies first rather than top-down international agreements. Through analysis of the steel sector in China, India, and Japan, the document finds that national sovereignty and diverse domestic priorities make a common international solution unlikely. It concludes that SAAMs can co-exist with carbon pricing and that their implementation is hindered by both political sensitivities and technical challenges, such as data gaps and the difficulty of setting international benchmarks.

The document argues that Sectoral Approaches (SAs) are often misunderstood as top-down international carbon pricing schemes, whereas practical implementation requires a 'bottom-up' approach starting with domestic policies. Through case studies of the steel industry in China, India, and Japan, the author demonstrates that national priorities and sovereignty concerns make a single internationally agreed common solution unlikely. Instead, the paper suggests renaming SAs to 'SAAMs' to remove pejorative connotations and recommends that these measures co-exist with carbon taxes or Emission Trading Schemes (ETS) to drive the breakthrough technologies and RDD&D investment needed for deep decarbonization. The author concludes that while domestic schemes are more feasible, they should be linked internationally to manage trade competitiveness and leakage.

The report argues that significant emissions reductions in Japan's steel sector require breakthrough technologies or CCS, as current efficiency is already high. It proposes two SAAM variants: one based on a fully-resourced research, development, diffusion and deployment (RDD&D) plan, and another based on regulating CO2 limits for plants. The analysis suggests that the sector's financial resources could support a significant scale-up of RDD&D, though the high cost of implementing CCS remains a major hurdle. The report also reviews the role of the Nippon Keidanren's voluntary plans and international partnerships like the Asia-Pacific Partnership (APP) and the World Steel Association (WSA).

The report finds that the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) has largely failed to meet its core objectives of additionality, sustainable development, and low-carbon technology transfer. In the EU, the use of CDM credits has significantly reduced domestic abatement efforts, potentially increasing global emissions by 30 to 106 million tonnes of CO2eq between 2008 and 2009 due to non-additional projects. The authors argue that the CDM often subsidizes carbon-intensive activities and creates perverse incentives that discourage developing countries from implementing national mitigation policies. To realign results with climate goals, the report proposes limiting project eligibility to those providing long-term sustainable benefits, differentiating crediting periods by project type, and introducing tradable or institutionally procured usage rights within the EU ETS.

The report analyzes the aluminium sector's exposure to carbon leakage, finding that while the sector as a whole is trade-intensive, the risk varies by product. Unwrought non-alloy aluminium is identified as particularly vulnerable due to high trade and CO2 intensity, whereas secondary aluminium and semi-fabricated products pose lower risks. The study highlights a shift in primary production capacity toward China and the Middle East, while the EU27 remains a leader in recycling but continues to export scrap to China.

The report assesses how the EU can achieve a 30% greenhouse gas reduction by 2020, analyzing the interplay between the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS), renewable energy targets, and energy efficiency goals. It finds that full implementation of energy efficiency and renewable targets, combined with post-recession baselines, could lead to a domestic reduction of approximately 30%. The analysis also explores the impact of offsets and LULUCF accounting, noting that these mechanisms could reduce the required domestic effort to between 17% and 22% while still nominally meeting a 30% target. The report concludes that a 25% to 30% domestic reduction is consistent with long-term goals of 80% to 95% reduction by 2050.

The report analyzes the pulp, paper, and paperboard sectors, finding that while both are classified as at risk of carbon leakage under EU ETS criteria, the drivers of trade intensity are often related to biomass availability and market effects rather than carbon pricing. It highlights a trend of the EU importing raw pulp and low-quality paper while exporting high-quality products, and notes that the export of recovered paper to China may cause 'negative carbon leakage' by depriving EU producers of low-emission raw materials.

The report details a task force meeting in Manila, Philippines, focused on the 'Development Dividend' in REDD—the balance between greenhouse gas reductions (quantity) and sustainable development benefits (quality), such as poverty alleviation and indigenous rights (equity). Key discussions centered on the technical and political challenges of Measurement, Reporting and Verification (MRV), the implementation of socio-environmental safeguards, and the role of market versus non-market financing. The document also provides updates on national REDD strategies from various countries, including Brazil, Indonesia, and the Philippines, and proposes a research agenda to clarify forest definitions and governance structures for benefit sharing.

The Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) defends its findings that adipic acid CDM projects maintain a strong competitive advantage and risk carbon leakage. SEI argues that even when accounting for lower primary CER prices and Chinese taxes, CDM revenues remain significant. It further contends that the higher plant utilization rates in CDM plants compared to non-CDM plants, particularly in Asia, indicate that CDM incentives—rather than just regional economic shifts or anti-dumping measures—prevented production cuts during the global financial crisis. To mitigate leakage, SEI proposes aligning CDM baseline emissions factors with the more stringent standards used in Joint Implementation (JI) projects.

The document details Climate Strategies' transition to a new research programme for 2011, focusing on eight themes including the low carbon economy and adaptation finance. It reviews 2010 projects on carbon pricing, power sector decarbonisation, and the EU's 2020 emissions targets. A significant portion of the text argues for a steel-specific negotiation forum within the UNFCCC to address carbon leakage and competitiveness, and proposes 'Climate Innovation Centres' (CICs) to facilitate technology transition in developing countries through multi-disciplinary coordination.

The report outlines a proposed sectoral approach for the Japanese steel industry to meet a projected 50% emission reduction by 2050. It presents two variants: one based on a fully-resourced research, development, demonstration, and deployment (RDD&D) plan, and another based on regulating CO2 limits for steel plants. The document emphasizes that sustainable reductions require breakthrough technologies or CCS, noting that while the Japanese sector has the financial resources to scale up RDD&D, the high cost of full CCS implementation could lead to competitiveness issues and carbon leakage without international coordination or protective measures like border taxes.

The study finds that the CDM successfully incentivized N2O abatement in the nitric acid sector, where such practices were previously rare. While the risk of carbon leakage and systematic baseline manipulation is judged to be low for nitric acid projects—especially compared to adipic acid projects—the authors highlight significant issues with current methodologies. These include complexity leading to credit issuance delays and a system that rewards high-emitting plants. To resolve these, the authors recommend implementing a benchmark factor for baseline emissions, potentially in the range of 4 to 5 kg N2O per tonne of nitric acid.

The document critiques carbon trading as an unreliable mechanism that shifts the burden of mitigation to developing countries and benefits the Northern financial industry. It proposes a comprehensive package of alternatives: for mitigation, it suggests global feed-in tariffs for renewables, energy efficiency standards, sustainable small-scale agriculture, and the protection of Indigenous forest rights. For climate finance, it identifies a potential US$420 billion per year in new funding through a global Financial Transaction Tax, cracking down on tax evasion, redirecting fossil-fuel producer subsidies, issuing new Special Drawing Rights, and implementing carbon and energy taxes.

The report critiques carbon trading as a 'risky, irresponsible and dangerous' tool that diverts attention from viable solutions. It proposes a comprehensive package of alternatives: investing US$100 billion annually in renewable energy feed-in tariffs, transitioning to small-scale sustainable agriculture, protecting forests by addressing drivers like agrofuels, and implementing international industrial standards for the 'best available technologies'. For climate finance, it suggests a combination of a global financial transaction tax, combating tax evasion, redirecting fossil fuel subsidies, issuing Special Drawing Rights, and implementing carbon and energy taxes, which could collectively provide at least US$420 billion annually for developing nations.

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 analysis finds that while the CDM enabled previously unachieved N2O emission abatement levels in adipic acid production, it also led to significant carbon leakage during the 2008 and 2009 economic downturn. It is estimated that approximately 20% of the Certified Emission Reductions (CERs) issued for these plants during that period, totaling about 13.5 MtCO2e, did not represent real emission reductions.

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.

The policy brief argues that the steel sector, responsible for 5% of global CO2 emissions, requires a dedicated international negotiation forum within the UNFCCC to overcome competitiveness fears and leakage. It proposes a 'bottom-up' approach where existing national policies—such as China's energy efficiency targets and India's 'Perform, Achieve and Trade'—serve as building blocks. The author identifies six abatement categories ranging from closing inefficient plants to developing breakthrough technologies, noting that carbon pricing alone is insufficient to realize these opportunities. The brief recommends that the UNFCCC establish a steel-specific forum involving both government and industry to coordinate technology transfers, minimum standards for new plants, and funding for Carbon Capture & Storage (CCS).

The briefing argues that the steel sector, which accounts for 5% of global CO2 emissions, requires a dedicated international framework to prevent emissions growth driven by demand. It recommends a 'bottom-up' approach using existing national policies—such as China's energy efficiency targets and India's 'Perform, Achieve and Trade'—as building blocks. To overcome competitiveness fears and carbon leakage, the author proposes establishing a steel-specific negotiation forum within the UNFCCC. This forum would address six abatement categories, ranging from closing inefficient plants to developing breakthrough technologies, and would integrate technical industry expertise to ensure ambitious national commitments.