Search Climate Insights Directory

The report analyzes the potential for scaling up cattail harvesting in Manitoba, identifying it as a viable biomass source for bioenergy and a tool for reducing nutrient loading in Lake Winnipeg. It finds a current lack of explicit legislation for cattail harvesting and proposes two management scenarios: one emphasizing private benefits (modeled on wild rice harvesting) and another emphasizing public benefits (funded through contracts and incentives). The analysis also explores carbon offset opportunities, suggesting that while national and provincial markets are fragmented, the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) and Alberta's protocols offer viable models for generating credits from methane avoidance and fossil fuel displacement.

The document highlights a massive surplus of 13.1 billion tonnes of CO2 from the first Kyoto commitment period (CP1), far exceeding estimated demand. It notes that weak emissions pledges and lenient offset rules are likely to create an additional 3.6 billion tonne surplus by 2020. In response, the G-77 and China, incorporating views from the African Group, AOSIS, and Brazil, proposed restrictions on the use of CP1 Assigned Amount Unit (AAU) surpluses in the second commitment period (CP2).

The submission advocates for carbon pricing in the international aviation and maritime sectors to reduce emissions and generate funds for climate action, while cautioning against the use of non-additional offsets based on experiences with JI and CDM.

The report finds that Suriname lacks legal recognition for indigenous and tribal peoples as collectivities, leaving their traditional land and resource rights unprotected. This legal vacuum allows the state to issue extractive concessions and establish protected areas without the free, prior, and informed consent of local communities, often criminalizing traditional subsistence activities. While the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has issued landmark rulings, such as the Saramaka case, requiring the recognition of collective titles and juridical personality, the report concludes that the Surinamese government has failed to implement these mandates, maintaining a discriminatory legal environment that undermines both human rights and biodiversity conservation.

The report concludes that there is insufficient scientific evidence to support the use of biochar as a reliable climate change mitigation tool. A review of 329 references found that only 15 field studies measured biochar decomposition, and of those, only six provided data to estimate stability. These six studies showed wildly varying results, with mean residence times (MRT) ranging from 8.3 years to over 3,000 years. The authors argue that the science is too immature to justify public investment in biochar for carbon sequestration, as the influence of biochar on the whole system carbon balance remains poorly quantified.

The report argues that the EU ETS is failing due to a massive oversupply of allowances caused by the 2008 economic recession and industrial overallocation. Sandbag identifies a total excess of 3.1 billion tonnes (Gt) of allowances, including 2.2Gt from obsolete demand forecasts and 0.9Gt from industrial overallocation. The document highlights that 78% of the net surplus is concentrated among ten steel and cement companies, which have generated significant revenues from selling surplus permits. To remedy this, the report recommends the permanent cancellation of 3.1Gt of allowances from Phase 3 auctions, the establishment of a more ambitious Phase 4 carbon budget aligned with 2050 goals, and the introduction of mechanisms like a "heat exchanger" and a strategic demand-correction reserve to protect the system from future exogenous shocks.

CDM Watch supports the existence of materiality standards to avoid excessive auditing costs and protect small, truly additional projects. However, it contends that the thresholds established at COP17 in December 2011 are too lenient and risk compromising environmental integrity. These thresholds range from 0.5% for projects exceeding 500,000 offsets per year to 10% for micro-scale project activities.

The document argues that the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) has failed its dual goals of reducing emissions and promoting sustainable development. It highlights that 40-70% of projects are non-additional, meaning they would have occurred without CDM registration, and that many projects cause social and environmental harm. The signatories call for the exclusion of fossil fuel and large hydro projects, the implementation of 'do no harm' assessments, and the creation of meaningful public participation and grievance mechanisms.

The document expresses concerns that carbon credit offsets within the EU Emissions Trading System (EU-ETS) and the Effort Sharing Decision (ESD) undermine domestic emission reductions. It specifically calls for Portugal to prohibit offsets from industrial HFC-23 and N2O emissions, coal-fired power plants in developing countries, large-scale hydropower projects under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), and Phase I Joint Implementation (JI) projects due to lack of environmental integrity and transparency.

The letter expresses concern that carbon offsets are undermining EU climate goals by stifling domestic emission reductions and supporting projects that lack environmental integrity. It specifically highlights the negative impacts of coal-fired power plants and large hydro projects in the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), as well as the lack of transparency in Track 1 Joint Implementation (JI).

The letter expresses concern that 555 million carbon offset credits were surrendered into the EU ETS between 2008 and 2011, costing an estimated €5.9bn. The signatories argue that offsets stifle domestic reductions, support business-as-usual coal and large hydro projects in the CDM, and allow for 'hot-air laundering' through Track 1 Joint Implementation.

The statement details the social, environmental, and human rights conflicts surrounding the Barro Blanco hydroelectric project in Panama. It highlights the resistance of the Ngäbe Bugle indigenous people, the failure of stakeholder consultations, and the ecological risks to the Tabasará River, while criticizing the project's approval under the UN's CDM offsetting scheme.

The report documents how the Ugandan government's drive for foreign investment has led to large-scale land grabs for industrial agriculture, carbon credits, and oil exploration. In Kalangala, the oil palm project has caused deforestation, water contamination, and food insecurity, while displacing local populations. Similar patterns of dispossession are noted in carbon offset projects in Mt Elgon and Bukaleba, and oil exploration in Buliisa. The document argues that these trends are driven by global over-consumption and calls for a shift toward agro-ecological farming and the protection of customary land rights.

The 66th CDM Executive Board meeting established the 2012-2013 business plan and the 2012 Management Plan, which includes a commitment to assess improvements for demonstrating additionality in large-scale projects. The Board is transitioning to a risk-based approach for project registration to handle an expected surge in applications before 2012 year-end EU restrictions. Other key developments include the creation of a permanent working group for Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) and ongoing debates regarding perverse incentives in nitric acid N2O abatement methodologies. Carbon Market Watch expressed concern over the risk-based approach and the lack of Board discussion regarding the price collapse of EU-ETS allowances and CDM credits.

The report details a global movement of small-scale farmers and activists resisting the corporate power of agribusiness, specifically Monsanto. It highlights legal battles, moratoria, and direct actions against GM crops in Europe, India, Latin America, and Africa. The document argues that the 'green economy' and 'climate-smart agriculture' frameworks are being used to further corporate control over seeds and land through market-based mechanisms and carbon offsets, while promoting food sovereignty as a sustainable alternative.

The report details a global movement of peasants and civil society organizations resisting Monsanto's influence on agriculture. It highlights specific battles in Europe, India, Latin America, and Africa, where activists fight against GMO seeds, toxic pesticides like Roundup, and the corporate control of seed systems. The document argues that the 'green economy' and 'climate-smart agriculture' are market-driven frameworks that facilitate corporate land grabbing and the spread of biotechnology. It advocates for food sovereignty—the right of peoples to define their own food and production systems—as a sustainable path to mitigate climate change and ensure food security.

The report documents global opposition to Monsanto and other biotechnology firms, highlighting the social and environmental costs of GM crops. It details resistance movements in Europe, India, Latin America, and Africa, while critiquing the 'green economy' and 'climate-smart agriculture' as market-driven mechanisms that reinforce corporate control. The authors advocate for food sovereignty and peasant-led agroecology as the only viable paths to climate resilience and food security.

The document details a project to harvest cattails in Manitoba to reduce phosphorus loading in Lake Winnipeg and replace coal with biomass for heating. It explores various bioenergy pathways, including solid fuel, biocarbon, and advanced biofuels, while analyzing the potential for carbon offsets through the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) and provincial regimes.

The document critiques the application of carbon trading in Africa, asserting that the continent remains marginal to the global market. It highlights how the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) creates perverse incentives, such as rewarding illegal gas flaring in Nigeria or subsidising fossil fuel dependence, while providing minimal financial benefit to local communities. The author argues that carbon offsets act as an 'avoided responsibility mechanism' for the global North and recommends shifting toward more just forms of climate finance.

CDM Watch urges the CDM policy dialogue panel to reassess project eligibility to ensure contributions to a low carbon economy and to improve stakeholder involvement and transparency. The submission highlights the need to maintain environmental integrity across co-existing market mechanisms and specifically identifies issues such as additionality, HFC-23 abatement, and human rights for address.