Search Climate Insights Directory

Carbon Market Watch outlines critical reforms needed for the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) review at COP-19. The author warns that failure to address quality issues, particularly regarding additionality, could lead to an over-supply of more than 4 gigatonnes of CO2 offsets and drive prices below 1 EURO. Key recommendations include transitioning away from large-scale power supply projects, moving beyond pure offsetting to avoid double counting, shortening crediting periods to match technology lifespans, and establishing human rights standards. The document also calls for improved sustainable development monitoring, strengthened civil society participation through a CDM Ombudsman, and a restructuring of auditor payment to eliminate conflicts of interest.

The report analyzes the design and operational experiences of various emissions trading systems, including the EU ETS, RGGI, WCI, NZ ETS, TMG ETS, and the Australian CPM. It highlights key design trade-offs regarding coverage, allowance distribution, and price management, while emphasizing that the EU ETS experience demonstrates that over-allocation does not necessarily preclude abatement. The document also provides a toolkit for policymakers to assess the environmental and economic effectiveness of such systems.

The report finds that while global economic impacts of market-based measures (MBMs) for international aviation and shipping are small, effects vary significantly by country. Small, remote island states dependent on air tourism, such as Samoa, face the highest GDP risks, while large economies like China and India experience minimal impacts. The study concludes that MBM revenues and increased demand for Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) offsets can be used to mitigate these undesired economic effects.

The document analyzes Canada's 2012 carbon policy transition, marked by the official withdrawal from the Kyoto Protocol and the implementation of federal sector-based regulations for transport and coal-fired electricity. It highlights a growing trend toward 'equivalency agreements' where the federal government defers to provincial policies, potentially leading to a fragmented national landscape. The report also notes provincial initiatives, such as Quebec's cap-and-trade linkage with California and Ontario's coal phase-out, while recommending greater compliance flexibility and a clearer federal policy vision to reduce costs and meet 2020 targets.

The document examines how Taiwan can engage with international carbon markets despite not being a party to the UNFCCC or the Kyoto Protocol. It analyzes formal eligibility requirements and material 'market readiness' conditions across various systems, including the EU ETS, RGGI, WCI, and others. The study suggests that while formal treaty-based access is restricted, Taiwan can utilize indirect participation, bilateral cooperation, and the development of a robust domestic cap-and-trade system with absolute targets to facilitate future linkage.

The report analyzes a diverse array of cap-and-trade systems, from the established EU ETS to emerging pilots in China and South Korea. It argues that the success of these markets depends heavily on long-term political commitment, robust data collection, and centralized decision-making to avoid over-allocation. The authors highlight a shift in the center of carbon market activity toward Asia-Pacific economies, which are experimenting with novel scopes including buildings and indirect emissions.

The briefing argues that any ICAO market-based measure must rely on stringent requirements to ensure emissions reductions are real, permanent, additional, and verified. It recommends that only UNFCCC-guided offset credits be eligible, while specifically advising against the use of Joint Implementation (JI) credits, voluntary market offsets, and bilateral mechanisms due to quality and oversight concerns. Furthermore, it warns that any cap-and-trade system must avoid over-allocation and prohibits the use of surplus allowances from oversupplied schemes like the EU ETS to maintain environmental integrity.

The paper assesses the technical parameters used to calculate emission reductions for improved cookstoves, specifically focusing on biomass fuel consumption, the fraction of non-renewable biomass, and emission factors. It identifies significant uncertainties in current Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Gold Standard methodologies, noting that reliance on laboratory tests like the Water Boiling Test often fails to reflect real-world performance. The authors argue that current accounting may under-credit projects by ignoring non-CO2 gases and black carbon, and by using fossil fuel emission factors as surrogates for biomass. The document recommends incorporating uncertainty accounting, refining monitoring through data loggers, and developing more localized, sub-national assessments for non-renewable biomass.

The document examines the technical challenges and gaps in accounting for greenhouse gas emissions in cookstove projects, specifically focusing on the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and voluntary offset programs. It identifies critical uncertainties in estimating biomass fuel savings, monitoring stove usage, and determining the fraction of non-renewable biomass used. The brief argues that current methodologies often rely on unscientific workarounds, such as using fossil fuel emission factors, and fail to account for significant non-CO2 climate impacts like black carbon.

The document examines how international offsets can provide a net atmospheric benefit by generating 'surplus reductions'—where actual emission reductions exceed the credits issued. It identifies key requirements for this to occur, including certain additionality, the avoidance of double-counting, and the use of accounting procedures that prevent surplus reductions from counting toward a host country's pledge. The brief analyzes the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), suggesting that industrial gas projects (HFC-23 and N2O) are particularly suited for discounts due to low marginal costs. It estimates that applying significant discounts to these project types could yield 111 to 136 million tonnes CO2e in surplus reductions by 2020, with a potential net atmospheric benefit of 80 to 100 million tonnes CO2e depending on host country pledge accounting.

The document argues that flexible mechanisms under the Kyoto Protocol, specifically the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Joint Implementation (JI), have failed to achieve net emission reductions due to non-additional credits and 'hot air' surpluses. It calls for a severe restriction on the trade of emission surpluses, the exclusion of fossil-fuel-based mega-projects from the CDM, and the establishment of international human rights and oversight standards for carbon projects.

The document argues that non-additional offset credits undermine climate protection and calls for the permanent cancellation of 'hot air' surplus permits, the strengthening of additionality criteria for Joint Implementation (JI) and the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), and the banning of fossil fuel-based power projects from generating credits.

The document argues that current market mechanisms under the Kyoto Protocol, specifically the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Joint Implementation (JI), are failing due to the issuance of non-additional credits and the accumulation of 'hot air' (excess AAUs). It calls for a strict regulation of emission permits, the prohibition of large-scale fossil fuel energy projects from generating credits, and the establishment of an arbitration mechanism to protect human rights and social impacts in CDM projects.

The report examines biochar—charcoal produced from biomass to store carbon—as a method for removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. While biochar could theoretically sequester carbon for thousands of years and improve soil fertility, a review of 212 peer-reviewed references indicates that current data are insufficient to accurately estimate its long-term stability. Consequently, the report concludes it is premature to rely on biochar as an effective climate mitigation tool or to allocate public resources for its deployment.

The document critiques the CDM's standardized baseline framework, arguing that its one-size-fits-all approach to performance thresholds and benchmarks may lead to both under-crediting and over-crediting of projects. It highlights risks to environmental integrity, particularly because the voluntary nature of these baselines may encourage developers to select them only when they yield more credits than project-based baselines.

The authors argue that the current CDM framework for standardized baselines is too rigid and impractical, potentially leading to both over-crediting and under-crediting of emission reductions. They recommend moving away from a single methodological approach in favor of sector-specific, data-driven baselines that are mandatory once approved and reflect technological trends over time.

The EU-ETS is the world's largest cap-and-trade system, regulating approximately half of the EU's CO2 emissions across 30 countries. While it has evolved through three trading periods to include more greenhouse gases and airline emissions, the system has suffered from severe over-allocation of allowances, leading to price collapses and a surplus of approximately 2 billion allowances by the end of 2012.

The document analyzes the divergent paths taken by Canada and Australia to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. While Australia implemented a unified national carbon pricing system (transitioning from a carbon tax to cap-and-trade), Canada adopted a decentralized, sector-by-sector regulatory approach utilizing provincial equivalency agreements. The authors argue that Canada's fragmented system is likely to result in higher regulatory costs for emitters compared to Australia's streamlined national approach, although the actual emission reductions of both schemes remain uncertain.

The document outlines the two primary forms of carbon pricing: emissions trading schemes (ETS) and carbon taxes. It details the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme as the world's largest, alongside regional programs like the RGGI in the US and the Tokyo Cap and Trade Program. It also lists numerous national carbon taxes, noting Finland as the first to introduce one in 1990, and describes hybrid systems in Australia and New Zealand.

The document examines Australia's carbon pricing scheme, which began on July 1, 2012, targeting the largest emitters to achieve a 5 per cent emissions reduction below 2000 levels by 2020. It details the transition from a fixed-price period to a flexible cap-and-trade system, the role of the Clean Energy Regulator, and extensive compensation packages for trade-exposed industries and households. The brief highlights the importance of the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Scheme (NGERS) as a foundation for implementation and warns against locking in fixed prices during volatile international market conditions.