Search Climate Insights Directory

Carbon Market Watch and a coalition of environmental organizations call on Austrian Airlines AG to reject industrial gas offset credits, arguing that such credits lack environmental integrity and undermine the EU ETS.

Carbon Market Watch and other NGOs call on British Airways to avoid using industrial gas offset credits, arguing that such credits lack environmental integrity and undermine the EU ETS.

Carbon Market Watch and a coalition of environmental organizations call on Brussels Airlines to protect the integrity of the EU ETS by avoiding industrial gas offset credits. The authors argue that credits from HFC-23 and adipic acid projects lack environmental integrity, do not represent real emissions reductions, and undermine international climate objectives.

Carbon Market Watch and a coalition of environmental organizations call on Easyjet Airline to avoid using industrial gas offset credits (HFC-23 and N2O from adipic acid) for its 2012 EU ETS emission reduction targets. The letter argues that these credits lack environmental integrity, do not represent real emissions reductions, and undermine both the Montreal Protocol and EU climate objectives.

Carbon Market Watch and a coalition of environmental organizations call on Germanwings to avoid using industrial gas offset credits, arguing that such credits lack environmental integrity and undermine EU climate objectives.

Carbon Market Watch and other organizations call on Ryanair to avoid using industrial gas offset credits, arguing that HFC-23 and adipic acid projects lack environmental integrity and undermine climate objectives.

An open letter from Carbon Market Watch and other NGOs to Scandinavian Airlines arguing that industrial gas offset credits, specifically HFC-23 and N2O from adipic acid projects, lack environmental integrity and undermine EU climate objectives. The authors highlight that a ban on these credits in the EU ETS takes effect on 1 May 2013 and argue that airline operators should not benefit from the postponement of this ban given the known environmental issues associated with these projects.

Carbon Market Watch and a coalition of environmental organisations call on Vueling Airlines to reject industrial gas offset credits, arguing that such credits lack environmental integrity and undermine the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS). The letter highlights a January 2011 decision by EU Member States to ban HFC-23 and N2O from adipic acid abatement projects from the EU ETS, effective 1 May 2013. The authors contend that these credits do not represent real emissions reductions, offer no sustainable development benefits, and undermine the Montreal Protocol and EU climate objectives.

The author contends that hydropower projects in Sikkim, such as Teesta III and Teesta VI, are not 'additional' because hydropower is common practice in India's North East, meaning they do not actually reduce emissions. The text alleges that developers misled the UNFCCC and bypassed mandatory stakeholder consultations regarding CDM credits. Furthermore, it highlights the failure to recognize Lepcha peoples' land rights and the absence of holistic impact assessments in Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs), leading to landslides and house destruction. The document concludes that the CDM's verification process is weak and calls for the immediate revocation of all big hydro CDM registrations in the region.

The document argues that the New Market Mechanism (NMM) and the Framework for Various Approaches (FVA) require a binding international governance structure to prevent double counting and ensure net atmospheric benefits. It identifies three types of double counting—unit type, double claiming, and overlapping mitigation/financial contributions—and calls for a common international transaction tracking mechanism. The author emphasizes that credits must be tied to the upholding of international human rights law and sustainable development indicators to avoid the failures observed under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).

Carbon Market Watch argues that the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) is facing a market collapse due to low demand and an over-supply of non-additional carbon credits. The organization urges a fundamental reform of additionality requirements, the shortening of crediting periods, and the establishment of human rights standards and grievance mechanisms. It further recommends strengthening civil society participation, addressing conflicts of interest among Designated Operational Entities (DOEs), and improving the governance and codes of conduct of the CDM Executive Board.

The document discusses the outcome of the COP18 meeting in Doha concerning the approximately 13 billion tonnes of CO2-equivalent surplus assigned amount units (AAUs) from the Kyoto Protocol's first commitment period (2008-2012). It identifies Russia, Ukraine, and Poland as the largest holders of these surpluses and notes that without restrictions, these units could allow countries to meet their second commitment period (2013-2020) targets without taking further action. The text outlines the various proposals from the African Group, AOSIS, Brazil, the G-77 and China, and Switzerland, as well as the internal EU compromise reached between countries seeking strict limits (Germany, UK, Denmark) and Poland.

Carbon Market Watch criticizes the development of New Market Mechanisms (NMM) and the Framework for Various Approaches (FVA) following COP-17 and COP-18. The author argues that these initiatives risk increasing the supply of low-quality carbon credits in a market already severely oversupplied, where offset prices are below 0.20 EURO. The document highlights a conflict between countries seeking 'flexible' rules (such as Japan, the US, and New Zealand) and those advocating for stringent, CDM-like oversight (such as the EU) to ensure environmental integrity and avoid double counting.

The document discusses the tension between the EU's unilateral inclusion of international aviation in its Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) and the need for a global agreement via ICAO. It warns against the use of low-quality offset credits, specifically industrial gas offsets and non-additional CDM credits, arguing that any global mechanism must prioritize real, permanent, and verified emissions reductions over supplementary offsets.

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 assesses worldwide methane emissions from the oil and gas sector, estimating 2010 emissions at 1,554 MMTCO2e. It argues that methane is a critical target for short-term climate mitigation due to its 20-year global warming potential (GWP) being 72 times that of carbon dioxide. The document details over 80 abatement technologies, such as vapor recovery units and infrared leak imaging cameras, while analyzing barriers including government price controls, lack of industry knowledge, and the complexities of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).

The report identifies synergies and trade-offs between climate change mitigation, adaptation, and food security in the agricultural sector. It evaluates existing international funding mechanisms—including carbon markets, multilateral funds, and Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs)—and proposes the creation of domestic 'gatekeeper institutions' to coordinate resources and overcome implementation fragmentation for smallholders.

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 Vietnam Green Growth Strategy (VGGS), approved in September 2012, seeks to restructure the economy for resource efficiency and sustainable growth. It sets specific targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption per unit of GDP by 2020, 2030, and 2050. Implementation is managed by an Inter-ministerial Coordinating Board and supported by a blend of public, private, and international financing, including the Green Climate Fund and potential carbon taxes.

The paper identifies five key drivers for CCD: national adaptation needs, energy security and resource efficiency, new economic opportunities, access to climate finance, and strong government leadership. It also outlines seven primary challenges, including high implementation and opportunity costs, opposition from vested interest groups, lack of trusted data, short-term political thinking, limited state capacity, institutional constraints, and technological uncertainties. The authors argue that managing the political economy of CCD is essential for overcoming these barriers.