Absolute or relative baselines for JI/CDM projects in the energy sector?

Absolute or relative baselines for JI/CDM projects in the energy sector?

Major US electric utility climate pledges have the potential to collectively reduce power sector emissions by one-third

Energy-related activities are a major contributor of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. A growing body of knowledge clearly depicts the links between human activities and climate change. Over the last century the burning of fossil fuels such as coal and oil and other human activities has released carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and other heat-trapping GHG emissions into the atmosphere and thus increased the concentration of atmospheric CO2 emissions. The main human activities that emit CO2 emissions are (1) the combustion of fossil fuels to generate electricity, accounting for about 37% of total U.S. CO2 emissions and 31% of total U.S. GHG emissions in 2013, (2) the combustion of fossil fuels such as gasoline and diesel to transport people and goods, accounting for about 31% of total U.S. CO2 emissions and 26% of total U.S. GHG emissions in 2013, and (3) industrial processes such as the production and consumption of minerals and chemicals, accounting for about 15% of total U.S. CO2 emissions and 12% of total ...

Executive Summary: The California Climate Action Registry, which was initially established in 2000 and began operation in Fall 2002, is a voluntary registry for recording annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The purpose of the Registry is to assist California businesses and organizations in their efforts to inventory and document emissions in order to establish a baseline and to document early actions to increase energy efficiency and decrease GHG emissions. The State of California has committed to use its ''best efforts'' to ensure that entities that establish GHG emissions baselines and register their emissions will receive ''appropriate consideration under any future international, federal, or state regulatory scheme relating to greenhouse gas emissions.'' Reporting of GHG emissions involves documentation of both ''direct'' emissions from sources that are under the entity's control and indirect emissions controlled by others. Electricity generated by an off-site power source is consider ed to be an indirect GHG emission and is required to be included in the entity's report. Registry participants include businesses, non-profit organizations, municipalities, state agencies, and other entities. Participants are required to register the GHG emissions of all operations in California, and are encouraged to report nationwide. For the first three years of participation, the Registry only requires the reporting of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, although participants are encouraged to report the remaining five Kyoto Protocol GHGs (CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6). After three years, reporting of all six Kyoto GHG emissions is required. The enabling legislation for the Registry (SB 527) requires total GHG emissions to be registered and requires reporting of ''industry-specific metrics'' once such metrics have been adopted by the Registry. The Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) was asked to provide technical assistance to the California Energy Commission (Energy Commission) related to the Registry in three areas: (1) assessing the availability and usefulness of industry-specific metrics, (2) evaluating various methods for establishing baselines for calculating GHG emissions reductions related to specific actions taken by Registry participants, and (3) establishing methods for calculating electricity CO2 emission factors. The third area of research was completed in 2002 and is documented in Estimating Carbon Dioxide Emissions Factors for the California Electric Power Sector (Marnay et al., 2002). This report documents our findings related to the first areas of research. For the first area of research, the overall objective was to evaluate the metrics, such as emissions per economic unit or emissions per unit of production that can be used to report GHG emissions trends for potential Registry participants. This research began with an effort to identify methodologies, benchmarking programs, inventories, protocols, and registries that u se industry-specific metrics to track trends in energy use or GHG emissions in order to determine what types of metrics have already been developed. The next step in developing industry-specific metrics was to assess the availability of data needed to determine metric development priorities. Berkeley Lab also determined the relative importance of different potential Registry participant categories in order to asses s the availability of sectoral or industry-specific metrics and then identified industry-specific metrics in use around the world. While a plethora of metrics was identified, no one metric that adequately tracks trends in GHG emissions while maintaining confidentiality of data was identified. As a result of this review, Berkeley Lab recommends the development of a GHG intensity index as a new metric for reporting and tracking GHG emissions trends.Such an index could provide an industry-specific metric for reporting and tracking GHG emissions trends to accurately reflect year to year changes while protecting proprietary data. This GHG intensity index changes while protecting proprietary data. This GHG intensity index would provide Registry participants with a means for demonstrating improvements in their energy and GHG emissions per unit of production without divulging specific values. For the second research area, Berkeley Lab evaluated various methods used to calculate baselines for documentation of energy consumption or GHG emissions reductions, noting those that use industry-specific metrics. Accounting for actions to reduce GHGs can be done on a project-by-project basis or on an entity basis. Establishing project-related baselines for mitigation efforts has been widely discussed in the context of two of the so-called ''flexible mechanisms'' of the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (Kyoto Protocol) Joint Implementation (JI) and the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM).

This paper discusses two important issues concerning the use of Joint Implementation (JI) and the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) under the Kyoto Protocol: — uncertainty in estimates of reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; and — contribution to and assessment of sustainable development. The analysis is based on assessments of several operational projects which reduce GHG emissions in countries in transition and developing countries. The projects are concentrated in the energy sector. When considering uncertainty in the estimates of GHG emissions reduction from JI/CDM projects, there are two main issues: construction of the baseline and accuracy of monitoring. Analysis across a range of project types led to estimates of baseline uncertainty which vary from 25% to 60%. Recommendations are made for measures to manage the uncertainty. In terms of contribution to sustainable development, the paper reports analysis of the case study projects in this context and makes recommendations for project aspects which are positive in this respect.

Market potential for Kyoto mechanisms—estimation of global market potential for co-operative greenhouse gas emission reduction policies

The Kyoto Protocol of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has introduced the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) as a scheme for greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction through cooperation between Annex 1 Parties (investing countries), which are committed to certain GHG emission reduction targets under the Kyoto Protocol, and non‐Annex 1 Parties (host countries), which do not have any commitments to reduce GHG emissions. The eligibility of forestry projects under the CDM is limited to afforestation/reforestation (A/R) projects. A/R CDM allows Certified Emissions Reduction Units (CERs) to be purchased through carbon sequestration by afforestation or reforestation projects in developing countries. A total of 17 methodologies have been approved by the Executive Board of the UNFCCC. Out of these, 11 approved methodologies are for large‐scale A/R CDM project activities and 6 are for small‐scale A/R CDM project activities. This study identifies some potential land use changes for the development of new and approved methodologies of A/R CDM project activities. These suggested land use changes with high potential are pasture lands, landfills, mountainous areas, and mined lands. The suggested future land uses in A/R CDM project activities are due to their good potential in sequestering carbon, success in the establishment of plantation, and unavailability of the approved methodologies of A/R CDM project activities that are applicable to these suggested land uses. A total of 8 project design documents (PDD) of A/R CDM project activities have been accepted by the Executive Board and registered under the Kyoto Protocol of the UNFCCC. Some of the problems with A/R CDM project activities include the planting of large scale monoculture plantations, the planting of exotic species, and impact on the hydrology of the project areas. Future directions of A/R CDM project activities are here suggested, which are implementing mixed species in a plantation, using native species during reforestation activities, and counting the soil organic carbon pools among the carbon pools measured for carbon sequestration.

implemented projects.While additionality and the quantification of emission reductions are, in principle, key considerations for unit quality for crediting mechanisms, the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions impact from using credits from already implemented projects is more complex.If the supply of credits considerably exceeds demand, a key consideration for the global GHG emissions impact is whether already implemented projects would continue to reduce GHG emissions even without credit revenues, or whether they are 'vulnerable' to discontinuing GHG abatement.A detailed assessment of the status and operating conditions of projects under the Clean Development Mechanism, and their marginal costs of supplying credits, shows that most projects would continue GHG abatement even if they cannot sell credits.If CORSIA allows airline operators the unlimited use of offset credits from these projects, this will not only undermine its environmental objectives but also lead to continued low carbon prices, and thus neither offer incentives for new investments nor lead to any significant revenues for already implemented projects.The thesis recommends limiting eligibility under CORSIA to new or 'vulnerable' projects (Chapter 5).Unit quality is also a key consideration when linking emissions trading systems (ETSs).As linking of ETSs faces several practical and political challenges and risks, including with regard to whether allowances have 'quality' and whether linking provides incentives or disincentives to enhance the ambition of caps, policy-makers are considering also restricted forms of linking ETSs.The thesis uses a simple economic model and three criteria -abatement outcome, economic implications, and feasibility -to assess three different options for implementing restricted linking of ETSs: quotas, exchange rates, or discount rates.The analysis shows that quotas can enhance cost-effectiveness relative to no linking and allow policy-makers to retain control on the extent of unit flows.Exchange rates could enhance abatement and economic benefits or have unintended adverse implications for cost-effectiveness and total abatement, depending on how rates are set.Due to information asymmetries between the regulated entities and policy-makers setting the exchange rate, and uncertainties about future developments, setting exchange rates in a manner that avoids such unintended consequences could prove difficult.Discount rates, in contrast, can ensure that both cost-effectiveness and total abatement are enhanced.The thesis recommends the consideration of quotas or discount rates, but to refrain from using exchange rates, due to the environmental integrity risks (Chapter 6).The varying scope and ambition of current NDC targets, and possible disincentives to broaden their scope and enhance their ambition, could be addressed by facilitating the adoption of ambitious and economy-wide mitigation targets and by preventing the transfer of carbon market units in situations of high environmental integrity risks.This latter approach could be implemented through eligibility criteria or limits on the generation, transfer or use of carbon market units.Limits could in particular address the risk that some countries have mitigation targets that correspond to higher levels of Summary 10 emissions than independent projections of their likely emissions.If such 'hot air' can be transferred to other countries, it could increase aggregated emissions and create a perverse incentive for countries not to enhance the ambition of future mitigation targets.The thesis proposes a typology for such limits, explores key design options, and tests different types of limits in the context of fifteen countries.The analysis indicates that limits to international transfers could, if designed appropriately, prevent most of the hot air contained in current mitigation targets from being transferred, but also involve trade-offs between different policy objectives (Chapter 7).The thesis concludes by discussing how four strategies to mitigate environmental integrity risks -robust accounting, ensuring unit quality, facilitating economy-wide and ambitious mitigation targets, and restricting international transfers -could be implemented under the Paris Agreement and CORSIA (see Figure S-1).Crediting mechanisms pose higher risks for environmental integrity than linking of ETSs and should therefore have a limited role in the future.International oversight can reduce the risks to environmental integrity to some extent.Acquiring countries could also reduce risks by only acquiring units from countries that also have ambitious NDC targets.Overall, policy-makers should not regard carbon market approaches as the one and only 'silver-bullet' to mitigating climate change but carefully assess what policy instrument or mix of instruments is best suited achieve and balance different policy objectives, in particular in light of the rapid transition that is necessary to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement (Chapter 8). How can the environmental integrity of international carbon market mechanisms be ensured in the new context of the Paris Agreement?To assess this, further research questions are:1. How should environmental integrity be defined in the context of international carbon market mechanisms?1. Accounting for the international transfer of carbon market units: Article 6.2 of the Paris Agreement requires countries to "apply robust accounting to ensure, inter alia, the avoidance of double counting".A lack of robust accounting could undermine environmental integrity in several ways (Chapter 2).If emission reductions are double counted, for example, actual global GHG emissions are higher than the sum of what individual countries report (see Chapter 3).Establishing and implementing robust accounting rules is thus an important prerequisite for achieving environmental integrity (see Chapters 2 and 3).An important question is therefore how robust accounting can be implemented in the new context of the Paris Agreement, taken into account the diverse scopes, metrics, types and timeframes of current NDC targets.Chapter 7: When less is more: Limits to international transfers under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement Chapter 8: Discussion, conclusions and recommendations Note: Dark green indicates that this aspect is the main focus of the chapter.Bright green indicates that this aspect is also considered.Grey indicates that this aspect is not considered.Chapter 5 takes up a matter that is controversially debated under both ICAO and the Paris Agreement: whether carbon market units from the Kyoto mechanisms should be eligible for use after 2020.The chapter assesses the environmental and economic implications of using offset credits from the largest mechanism to date -the CDM -under CORSIA, and analyses what type of eligibility criteria are necessary to perverse environmental integrity.Towards this end, a model is established that estimates the supply potential and the costs of generating certified emission reductions (CERs) for each of the 8,000 registered CDM projects and assesses under which conditions creating new demand for CERs from already existing projects triggers actual emission reductions, taking into account differences between project types.Chapter 6 turns the focus from crediting mechanisms to another form of international carbon market mechanisms: the linking of ETSs.Several jurisdictions are considering, or 'hot air' -a term used in context of mitigation targets that countries over-achieve without pursuing further mitigation actions (Boehringer, 2000;den Elzen & de Moor, 2002;Kollmuss et al., 2015).They could, however, also be used to address other environmental integrity risks, such as the lack of robust accounting system, concerns related unit quality, or possible disincentives to enhance mitigation action in the future.This chapter proposes a typology for limits, explores key design options, and quantitatively tests different types of limits in the context of fifteen countries.Lastly, Chapter 8 discusses the overall findings of the thesis, provides conclusions and makes recommendations.These can inform the ongoing negotiations on Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, and the implementation of carbon market mechanisms by countries, jurisdictions and international organizations, such as ICAO.Chapter 2Environmental integrity of international carbon market mechanisms 19Chapter 2Environmental integrity of international carbon market mechanisms under the Paris

Environmental innovations hold promise for cutting greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, but most technology investments are made in large technologically leading countries. Thus, emission reductions in small open economies, such as the Nordic countries, depend on not only domestic technological development, but also technology spillovers from foreign countries. The present study analysed how the development of climate change technologies affected the Nordic countries' GHG emissions from the industrial and energy sectors during a particular time frame. Consequently, while controlling for economic growth and population, domestic and foreign technological development's effects on industrial and energy sector GHG emissions were examined from the 1990–2019 period. The results revealed that both domestically developed environmental technologies and technology spillovers from foreign economies mitigated GHG emissions from these nations' energy and industrial sectors, thereby providing an efficient pathway to achieving sectoral environmental sustainability. In particular, domestic environmental technologies were found to be more efficient in driving environmental sustainability in the industrial sector, whereas impacts from domestic and foreign technological development did not differ significantly in the energy sector. Furthermore, given that economic growth plays a vital role in GHG emissions, environmental Kuznets curve (EKC; inverted U-shaped and U-shaped) relationships have been observed in the energy and industrial sectors, respectively. This suggests that the examined countries' industrial sectors have more environmental quality hurdles to overcome.

Mitigating Curtailment and Carbon Emissions through Load Migration between Data Centers

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from post-consumer waste and wastewater are a small contributor (about 3%) to total global anthropogenic GHG emissions. Emissions for 2004-2005 totalled 1.4 Gt CO2-eq year(-1) relative to total emissions from all sectors of 49 Gt CO2-eq year(-1) [including carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and F-gases normalized according to their 100-year global warming potentials (GWP)]. The CH4 from landfills and wastewater collectively accounted for about 90% of waste sector emissions, or about 18% of global anthropogenic methane emissions (which were about 14% of the global total in 2004). Wastewater N2O and CO2 from the incineration of waste containing fossil carbon (plastics; synthetic textiles) are minor sources. Due to the wide range of mature technologies that can mitigate GHG emissions from waste and provide public health, environmental protection, and sustainable development co-benefits, existing waste management practices can provide effective mitigation of GHG emissions from this sector. Current mitigation technologies include landfill gas recovery, improved landfill practices, and engineered wastewater management. In addition, significant GHG generation is avoided through controlled composting, state-of-the-art incineration, and expanded sanitation coverage. Reduced waste generation and the exploitation of energy from waste (landfill gas, incineration, anaerobic digester biogas) produce an indirect reduction of GHG emissions through the conservation of raw materials, improved energy and resource efficiency, and fossil fuel avoidance. Flexible strategies and financial incentives can expand waste management options to achieve GHG mitigation goals; local technology decisions are influenced by a variety of factors such as waste quantity and characteristics, cost and financing issues, infrastructure requirements including available land area, collection and transport considerations, and regulatory constraints. Existing studies on mitigation potentials and costs for the waste sector tend to focus on landfill CH4 as the baseline. The commercial recovery of landfill CH4 as a source of renewable energy has been practised at full scale since 1975 and currently exceeds 105 Mt CO2-eq year(-1). Although landfill CH4 emissions from developed countries have been largely stabilized, emissions from developing countries are increasing as more controlled (anaerobic) landfilling practices are implemented; these emissions could be reduced by accelerating the introduction of engineered gas recovery, increasing rates of waste minimization and recycling, and implementing alternative waste management strategies provided they are affordable, effective, and sustainable. Aided by Kyoto mechanisms such as the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Joint Implementation (JI), the total global economic mitigation potential for reducing waste sector emissions in 2030 is estimated to be > 1000 Mt CO2-eq (or 70% of estimated emissions) at costs below 100 US$ t(-1) CO2-eq year(-1). An estimated 20-30% of projected emissions for 2030 can be reduced at negative cost and 30-50% at costs < 20 US$ t(-) CO2-eq year(-1). As landfills produce CH4 for several decades, incineration and composting are complementary mitigation measures to landfill gas recovery in the short- to medium-term--at the present time, there are > 130 Mt waste year(-1) incinerated at more than 600 plants. Current uncertainties with respect to emissions and mitigation potentials could be reduced by more consistent national definitions, coordinated international data collection, standardized data analysis, field validation of models, and consistent application of life-cycle assessment tools inclusive of fossil fuel offsets.

GHG Mitigation Potentials of Thailand’s Energy Policies to Achieve INDC Target

There’s a market growing in the United States, but unlike markets that trade in tangible commodities, this one trades in the absence of something no one wants: greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Hundreds of companies make it possible for individuals, organizations, businesses, and even events such as rock music festivals to proclaim themselves carbon-neutral by paying someone else to reduce their emissions. Worried about your carbon footprint? No problem. For fees of US$2–50 per ton of “avoided emissions,” an offset provider will funnel your money into an activity or technology that keeps greenhouse gases out of the atmosphere. The question is, are offset buyers really getting what they paid for?

The role of sinks in the clean development mechanism (CDM) has been a subject of controversy for several reasons; one being that temporary carbon storage in forests appeared to prevent any opportunity to use them as an option to reduce permanent greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In Milan (December 2003), the Conference of the Parties (CoP) decided to address this problem by introducing two types of expiring units: temporary CERs (tCERs) and long-term CERs (lCERs). Countries committed to emission reductions may acquire these units to temporarily offset their emissions and thus to postpone permanent emission reductions. As further decided by the CoP, baseline emissions of GHGs and the enhancement of sinks outside the project boundary will not be accounted for in the calculation of tCERs or lCERs. The contribution of CDM-sink projects to GHG emissions abatement will therefore be greater than what will be credited to them. On the other hand, permanent GHG emissions that may result as a consequence of the implementation of sink project activities are treated as non-permanent. If these emissions are above avoided baseline emissions, CDM-sinks will result in net increases of GHG emissions into the atmosphere. After briefly reassessing the non-permanence problem, this article explains how tCERs and lCERs should be quantified according to Decision 19/CP.9 of CoP-9 and how calculations are implemented in the forthcoming software CO2 Land. Using a simple numerical example, it illustrates how the GHG accounting rule adopted at CoP-9 may result in net increases of GHG emissions. In the conclusion, a possible solution to this problem is proposed.

This paper analyzes the building process of the main greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (CO2, CH4 and N2O) inventory from the energy sector in Palestine. The paper includes determination tools, i.e., emission factors, to estimate the amounts of national GHG emissions from sub-sectors of energy including energy industries, manufacturing industries and construction, transport and other sectors (households, agriculture and commerce and public services). The results show that the total amount of national GHG emissions from the energy sector in 2016 was 4131 thousand metric tons of CO2-equivalent (TtCO2e), which represented 0.011% of the total global GHG emissions. The average value of GHG emissions per capita from the energy sector was 0.86 tCO2e in Palestine, and its gross domestic product was estimated at 3212$/ton of CO2e. The estimated amounts of CO2, CH4 and N2O emission from the energy sector were 4022, 49 and 60 TtCO2e, respectively. The transport and household sub-sectors dominated the national GHG emissions from the entire energy sector by 58 and 32%, respectively. In general, fuels including diesel, gasoline, wood and charcoal and liquefied petroleum gas made most of the total amount of the national GHG emissions from the energy sector at 50, 18, 18 and 12%, respectively. Finally, the mitigation actions included in the first nationally determined contribution of Palestine and recommendations to help lower the national GHG emissions from the Palestinian energy sector are provided.