Search Climate Insights Directory

Carbon Market Watch argues that the Framework for Various Approaches (FVA) should not be established or piloted until the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action (ADP) defines mitigation commitment requirements and common accounting rules. The author contends that carbon markets have failed to incentivize adequate national commitments and warns that without stringent eligibility criteria and international oversight, the FVA could facilitate the use of low-quality units and 'hot air' offsets. Key recommendations include linking market access to high ambition, eliminating all forms of double-counting to ensure a 'net atmospheric benefit', and excluding detrimental sectors like coal power and REDD+ activities from the framework.

Carbon Market Watch asserts that the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) undermines climate goals by allowing new coal power plants to earn emissions credits for efficiency improvements. The organization argues that these projects are not 'additional' because efficiency is driven by fuel cost minimization, not CDM support, leading to a net increase in global greenhouse gas emissions. The paper highlights the severe human and ecological costs of coal, citing high mortality rates in India and China, and calls for the UNFCCC to follow the lead of the Norwegian and British governments by ending CDM support for coal and other large-scale power projects.

A coalition of organizations requests transparency regarding EDF Trading's involvement in CDM project 2716 and calls for the project's approval to be withdrawn. The letter cites a Ministry of Environment and Forest report indicating that the project fails to meet sustainable development criteria, harms local fishing and pastoralist communities, and causes significant air pollution. Additionally, the authors argue that the project lacks additionality and relies on a flawed crediting methodology that was suspended in 2011.

A coalition of organizations requests that the French government provide transparency regarding EDF Trading's involvement in and subsequently withdraw its approval for CDM project 2716, a coal-fired power plant in Mundra, India. The authors argue the project fails sustainable development criteria due to environmental damage, lack of community consultation, and flawed carbon crediting methodologies.

The World Resources Institute supports the U.S. EPA's proposed emissions standards for new power plants as a key component of the President's Climate Action Plan. While the standards provide flexibility through carbon capture and storage (CCS) and reflect market shifts toward natural gas and renewables, the document emphasizes that addressing the existing power plant fleet is the most critical opportunity for emissions reductions, as electricity generation accounts for one-third of all U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.

The document is a letter from Bikash Rath of the Regional Centre for Development Cooperation to World Bank President Dr. Jim Yong Kim. It demands the withdrawal of International Finance Corporation (IFC) funding from the Tata Mundra - Coastal Gujarat Power Ltd. (CGPL) 4000 MW coal power project in Gujarat, India. The author alleges that the project has caused massive social and environmental damage, including the depletion of groundwater, destruction of mangroves, and severe health impacts on local communities, while failing to conduct proper impact assessments or consult affected fishing and pastoralist groups.

The document examines the evolution of the Southern African Power Pool (SAPP) from a cooperative pool to a competitive regional electricity market (REM). It highlights the role of the SADC Energy Protocol and the integration of independent power producers (IPPs) and renewable energy sources (RES), using South Africa's REIPPPP as a primary example of private sector participation. The analysis identifies significant challenges, including the lack of political will among member states, disparities in national energy policies, and infrastructure deficits, while noting the potential for regional integration through shared hydropower and thermal resources.

Carbon Market Watch proposes eleven specific reforms for the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) to be discussed at CMP8, focusing on additionality, project bans, human rights, and governance.

Carbon Market Watch criticizes the proposed revisions to the CDM coal crediting methodology (ACM0013), stating that they do not sufficiently address technical flaws such as data quality and project emissions. The organization warns that 45 coal projects in the pipeline, primarily in India and China, risk locking in over 400 million tCO2 in annual emissions, which contradicts the 2°C warming objective. It specifically highlights that six already registered projects will bypass the new rules and could generate 89 million credits based on a flawed methodology.

The document examines how DFI lending through financial intermediaries (FIs) reduces transparency, weakens environmental and social safeguards, and often fails to reach the poorest populations compared to direct investment. It highlights specific cases of land disputes and environmental degradation in India and Brazil, and recommends that DFIs prioritize local ownership, increase public disclosure of sub-projects, and implement stricter due diligence focused on development impact.

The document assesses the impact of large-scale power projects on the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), noting that these projects are expected to generate nearly 70% of total CERs between 2013 and 2020. It argues that additionality for these projects is difficult to demonstrate, potentially leading to a global increase in greenhouse gas emissions. The authors propose phasing out these projects to stabilize the carbon market and shifting support toward national policies like feed-in tariffs and carbon taxes.

The letter argues that CDM coal power projects are non-additional, generate artificial carbon credits, and lock in billions of tons of CO2 while causing health and ecosystem damage. It references a CDM Executive Board suspension and an independent SEI study to support the claim that revised methodologies cannot ensure real and measurable emission reductions, calling for a formal CMP decision at COP-17 to exclude these projects.

The policy note argues that revisions to the ACM0013 methodology can only partially address the issues surrounding CDM coal power projects. It identifies three fundamental challenges: a low signal-to-noise ratio in efficiency data, the ineffectiveness of additionality assessments for multi-billion-dollar projects, and the contradiction of using climate finance to lock in long-lived, emissions-intensive infrastructure. The authors conclude that these combined factors likely defy easy resolution through methodology revisions alone.

The report examines the CDM methodology ACM0013 used to award emission reduction credits to coal projects in India and China. It finds that the methodology is systematically flawed, leading to an estimated 250% over-crediting of Certified Emission Reductions (CERs). The authors argue that most projects are non-additional because the transition to supercritical and ultra-supercritical technology is already driven by rising coal prices and national policies. Furthermore, the report highlights a low signal-to-noise ratio where factors other than boiler technology significantly impact efficiency, making verifiable emission reductions difficult to estimate. The authors conclude that using climate finance to support coal investments may undermine global climate goals and suggest sectoral crediting as a more robust alternative.

The report finds that U.S. power plants withdraw massive volumes of freshwater, with coal and nuclear plants being the most water-intensive. This demand contributes to water-supply stress in hundreds of watersheds and is exacerbated by droughts and heat waves. The authors highlight significant gaps and inaccuracies in EIA reporting and advocate for 'water-smart' energy choices, such as dry cooling and low-water renewables, to ensure energy reliability and water security.

The document asserts that coal projects in the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) are non-additional, conflict with sustainability goals by harming local ecosystems, and lock in long-term CO2 emissions. It further claims that flawed CDM rules lead to significant over-crediting of these projects, which are often used merely as an additional revenue stream for planned investments.

The authors assert that avoiding the worst consequences of climate change requires virtually zeroing out electricity-related carbon emissions by mid-century, which necessitates the deployment of carbon capture and storage (CCS) for all fossil fuels. They highlight the critical risk posed by new coal power plants in China and India and criticize the U.S. policy approach as 'ad hoc and woefully inadequate', citing the shelving of American Electric Power's Mountaineer project. To drive deployment and lower costs, the authors recommend that the Obama Administration propose strong new source performance standards, the Department of Energy reform funding for initiatives like the Clean Coal Power Initiative, and Congress adopt significant industry incentives.

A formal request by Sierra Club and CDM Watch to the CDM Executive Board to review the additionality of Project 4533 in India. The authors argue that the project does not meet CDM rules because the Government of India mandated supercritical technology, financing was already secured, and the project sponsor's own shareholder communications describe CDM credits as a 'new revenue stream' rather than a necessity for implementation. They further contend that the project's baseline assumptions regarding coal prices are unrealistically low and that alternative energy efficiency scenarios were ignored.

The report criticizes the World Bank for its continued investment in 'dirty energy' and its leadership in expanding carbon markets. It highlights specific projects, such as the Medupi coal plant in South Africa and the Nam Theun 2 dam in Laos, as evidence of environmental and social harm. The document further contends that the Bank's promotion of REDD and carbon offsets leads to the privatization of forests and the marginalization of indigenous rights, while its role as an interim trustee for the Green Climate Fund is viewed as undemocratic and conflicted.

The document outlines four decades of activism by Friends of the Earth International, highlighting specific successes in banning commercial whaling in Spain, prohibiting open-pit mining in Costa Rica, and establishing the first climate change law in the UK. It details diverse campaigns against coal power in Germany, oil pollution in Nigeria, and genetically modified organisms in Europe, while emphasizing the role of grassroots mobilization and legal action in achieving environmental protections and human rights.