Search Climate Insights Directory

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.

Carbon Market Watch outlines its priorities for the high-level panel reviewing the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), emphasizing the need for the panel to assess the mechanism's impact on mitigation and sustainable development, ensure environmental integrity among co-existing market mechanisms, and improve stakeholder involvement.

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 contends that the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) fails to ensure environmental integrity in the waste sector, creating perverse incentives that prioritize waste disposal over recycling and composting. It highlights the displacement of informal waste pickers, the issuance of carbon credits for 'business-as-usual' projects that lack additionality, and the failure of landfill gas capture systems to prevent significant methane leakage. Specific examples include the Timarpur-Okhla plant in Delhi, the Bisasar landfill in Durban, and incinerators in China.

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 submission argues that current climate pledges are insufficient to limit warming to 2°C and warns that 'hot air' (surplus allowances) could allow developed countries to maintain business-as-usual emissions. It calls for a robust governance structure for Joint Implementation (JI) projects, focusing on transparency, environmental integrity, and the treatment of projects during the gap period.

Carbon Market Watch urges the EU to integrate shipping emissions into its climate policy to act as a global leader and ensure real emission reductions with high environmental integrity.

A joint submission by the Human Rights & Climate Change Working Group and various NGOs calling for the CDM to establish institutional safeguards, strengthen civil society participation, and create grievance mechanisms to address human rights violations associated with carbon offset projects.

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 document asserts that market-based mechanisms are insufficient on their own to finance necessary emission reductions and must be supported by public finance to build capacity and governance. It argues that international credits should not compete with domestic mitigation efforts in developing countries, nor should they replace domestic action in developed countries. Finally, it suggests that any new framework should be informed by the experiences of the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), Joint Implementation (JI), and the EU Emissions Trading System (EU-ETS).

Carbon Market Watch urges the CDM Executive Board to reform additionality requirements, shorten crediting periods, and mandate human rights compliance. The organization recommends establishing global sustainability standards, improving civil society participation through grievance mechanisms, reforming the appointment and payment of Designated Operational Entities (DOEs), and implementing a strict code of conduct for the Executive Board to prevent conflicts of interest.

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.

Carbon Market Watch challenges the validity of a JI project in Ukraine's Sverdlovsk district, arguing that the project's claim of additionality is not credible because it was operational for 4.5 years before the Letter of Approval was issued. The organization also contends that emission reductions are likely exaggerated due to a lack of supporting coal production data and flawed baseline assumptions regarding the spontaneous burning of waste heaps. Additionally, the document criticizes the project's physical boundaries for being insufficiently defined, noting that the project allows for the addition of new waste heaps and complexes during the monitoring period.

Carbon Market Watch and partner organizations challenge the registration of the Bujagali Hydropower Project under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). They argue the project is non-additional because it was already completed and deemed the 'least-cost' power option regardless of carbon credit income. The letter also highlights environmental damage to Lake Victoria and the displacement of approximately 6,800 people.

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 document argues that current emissions pledges from 42 developed countries, projected to reduce emissions by up to 4 billion tons of CO2e in 2020, are insufficient to meet the 2°C warming limit and are further undermined by accounting loopholes. It identifies five specific loopholes—including 'Hot Air' and LULUCF rules—and compares their cumulative size against the approximately 18 Gt of cumulative emissions reductions projected for the 2013-2020 period.

The document analyzes the risks associated with hydropower projects under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), noting that hydropower represents 30% of all registered CDM carbon offset projects as of September 2011. It argues that without effective criteria for additionality and sustainability, the CDM risks issuing credits for 'business-as-usual' projects and shifting mitigation costs to poor communities in the South. The study specifically focuses on China and India, which together hold 78% of registered hydropower CDM projects, as well as Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and the EU's application of World Commission on Dams (WCD) guidelines for projects selling credits into the European Emissions Trading Scheme.