Search Climate Insights Directory

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.

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 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 Cancun Climate Summit is characterized as a moderate success that restored faith in the multilateral process following the Copenhagen summit. Key outcomes included the first official UN agreement to keep global temperature increases below 2°C, the recognition of voluntary emission reduction plans for 2020, and the establishment of financial mechanisms for developing countries, including a 30 billion dollar transfer for 2010-2012 and the creation of the Green Climate Fund. While the summit made progress on measurement, reporting, and verification (MRV) and forest protection (REDD+), it left the decision on a second Kyoto Protocol period to the 2011 Durban summit. The authors attribute the success to the leadership of the Mexican government and the UNFCCC Executive Secretary.

A coalition of NGOs argues that HFC-23 projects, which account for half of all CDM carbon credits, are based on a flawed methodology leading to the over-issuance of credits that do not represent real emission reductions. The letter criticizes the CDM Executive Board for resuming credit issuance despite these findings and calls for the rescission of credits issued since 26 November 2010, a total halt on further issuance until methodology is corrected, and the adoption of HFC phase-down measures under the Montreal Protocol.

The document outlines the mechanisms of the Federal Production Tax Credit (PTC) and Investment Tax Credit (ITC), including eligibility requirements and expiration dates. It also details the Treasury cash grant, the Advanced Energy Manufacturing Tax Credit (MTC), and depreciation rules like MACRS.

The report analyzes the CDM project pipeline as of April 2010, finding that procedural delays and operational risks significantly reduce the actual supply of CERs compared to original project estimates. It projects that CER supply up to 2012 may be less than half of planned amounts and evaluates scenarios for the 2013-2020 period, highlighting a heavy dependence on five dominating host countries.

The letter advocates for a national programme of energy efficiency and a reduction in overall energy demand to improve energy security. It calls for an increase in the 2020 renewable energy target, a tenfold increase in renewable R&D funding—potentially funded by military budget cuts—and the implementation of a Renewable Heat Incentive. The authors argue against new nuclear build, insisting the industry pay full costs for waste management and insurance without public subsidies, and suggest delaying construction decisions until safety and waste assessments are complete.

The report argues that reducing global carbon dioxide emissions requires a shift from a narrow focus on R&D to a broader 'public works' model of innovation. It outlines four key principles: expanding innovation policy beyond R&D to include deployment and non-technical barriers; pursuing diverse technology and institutional pathways; treating CO2 reduction as a public good to justify government procurement and demonstration projects; and collaborating with rapidly industrializing nations. The document specifically illustrates these principles by suggesting the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) could accelerate building efficiency and small modular nuclear reactor (SMR) development through its unique procurement and infrastructure capabilities.

The guide emphasizes that avoiding dangerous climate change requires significant emissions reductions below 1990 levels by 2050, necessitating action at all levels of society. It highlights the unique role of local governments in implementing cost-effective community measures and educating the public on sustainable living. The text asserts that climate actions—such as improving energy efficiency, investing in public transit and biking infrastructure, developing renewable energy, and promoting local food production—not only reduce emissions but also lower energy bills, create green jobs, and enhance community resilience against economic downturns and extreme weather events.

The report examines the feasibility of sectoral agreements for GHG emission reductions in the steel sectors of China and India. It argues that while these countries are already achieving reductions beyond simple stock turnover, further abatement requires national approaches that address both price and non-price barriers. The study suggests that targeting specific abatement categories may be more realistic than a single sector-wide target due to uncertainties in costs and business-as-usual emissions, though it would offer less flexibility.

The response argues that while a UK carbon price floor aims to increase the viability of low-carbon investments, a unilateral approach may be discounted by investors due to regulatory instability and inconsistency with the EU Emission Trading Scheme (EU ETS). It suggests that strengthening the EU ETS targets would provide greater clarity, regulatory stability, and market scale for low-carbon technologies like CCS and nuclear power, compared to a national tax-based supplement.

The Greenhouse Development Rights (GDR) framework proposes a climate regime that defines national obligations based on responsibility and capacity, using a 'development threshold' to protect the welfare of individuals in developing nations while pursuing ambitious global emission reductions.

The document analyzes a draft text for international climate cooperation, emphasizing the need for domestic emission targets in Annex 1 countries to avoid loopholes and provide investment certainty. It argues that non-Annex I countries must develop low-emission plans and Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs), supported by developed countries' resources and carbon pricing on aviation and shipping. Finally, it calls for a political transition from the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) to tailored NAMA support to prevent carbon-intensive lock-in and incentivize domestic regulation.

The document asserts that the determination of payment responsibilities is critical for future international climate agreements. It argues that international market mechanisms are essential for providing the incentives and space necessary to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, suggesting that a robust framework could fundamentally transform global development, particularly for Canada.

The paper examines the challenges of defining 'comparable effort' for Annex I Parties, arguing that a simple set of transparent indicators is more conducive to political agreement than complex fairness models. It analyzes proposed 2020 targets against emissions, population, and GDP data, introducing 'trajectory indicators' to assess the consistency of short-term targets with 2050 goals. The authors highlight that Annex I countries fall into three distinct economic groups—'New World' economies, 'Old OECD' economies, and 'Transition economies'—which must be recognized for any target-setting to be feasible. Finally, the document reviews cost-based indicators, concluding that current model results are too inconsistent and outdated, particularly following the global financial crisis, to provide a reliable basis for cost-comparability without further harmonization.

The report details a March 2009 workshop in Vancouver where 32 diverse Canadian stakeholders discussed the future of the Internet through the lens of sustainability. Participants analyzed four scenarios—government-regulated, unregulated market, VIPnet (elite-only), and Internet commons—to identify critical uncertainties and policy needs. Key recommendations include pursuing universal broadband access, integrating ICT into national greenhouse gas reduction strategies, and establishing a Canadian Internet Governance Forum. The report argues that Canada needs a more unified, holistic ICT policy function within the government to ensure the Internet serves human and environmental needs rather than just economic growth.

The paper investigates the potential of CER discounting to address CDM shortcomings, such as non-additionality and the uneven distribution of projects. By analyzing abatement cost curves for China, India, advanced Asian countries, and LDCs, the authors find that while discounting can increase costs for advanced developing countries and potentially incentivize them to adopt their own mitigation commitments, it is insufficient on its own to make LDCs competitive. The study concludes that financial, technical, and institutional barriers in LDCs must be overcome for them to realize their theoretical abatement potential, as the abundance of cheap projects in countries like China continues to dominate the market.

Michelle Chan of Friends of the Earth testified that traditional cap-and-trade systems are prone to speculative bubbles and regulatory gaps, drawing parallels to the 2008 financial crisis. She warns that carbon offset credits and complex derivatives could lead to 'subprime carbon' risks where securities are based on non-existent or failing emission reductions. To avoid these risks, she advocates for the McDermott bill, which excludes carbon offsets and implements a stable carbon price to prevent boom-bust cycles.

Friends of the Earth International expresses deep disappointment with the outcomes of the Poznan climate talks, arguing that Annex I countries have prioritized 'get-out-clauses' and offsetting schemes over genuine emission reductions. The organization calls for a minimum 40% reduction in emissions below 1990 levels by 2020 and warns that the REDD mechanism risks undermining the rights of Indigenous peoples and biodiversity if it fails to distinguish natural forests from monoculture plantations.