www.perspectives.cc · [email protected] © 2011 perspectives gmbh towards practical application...
TRANSCRIPT
www.perspectives.cc · [email protected] © 2011 Perspectives GmbH
Towards practical application of CDM
Standardized Baselines –
Perspectives experience and comments on latest regulatory decision-making
Matthias Krey, Perspectives GmbH
29.09.2011
Latin American Carbon Forum, San José, Costa Rica, 27-29 September 2011
Panel: CDM Standardized Baselines: latest policy developments and
opportunities for application in LAC
www.perspectives.cc · [email protected]
Analytical groundwork conducted
2
Commissioned by the UK Department for International Development (DFID)
Project typeDevelopment of standardised methodology/case studies
Charcoal Cambodia Zambia Mali
Water purification Laos Zambia Benin
Rural electrification Cambodia Tanzania Benin
Step 1: Selection criteria
Step 2: Selection
Step 3: Evaluation
Sector selection
Identification of selection criteria for sectors
Selection of sectors
Evaluation of sectors shortlisted in step 2
Country selection
Identification of selection criteria for countries
Selection of countries
(1)Criteria for evaluation of sector/country combinations
(2)Evaluation of sector/country combinations
1 INCEPTION
2 DEVELOPMENT
www.perspectives.cc · [email protected]
Various elements of standardisation are possible: - Deemed additionality, penetration rates, global benchmarks, default factors, minimum
levels of service, statistical databases, omission of negligible sources of emissions, assumptions on usage patterns, aggregated default leakage, etc.
Benefits…- Conservative default assumptions replace data collection, can unlock specific project
types for which the determination of a baseline is cumbersome- Increased simplicity and decrease of transaction costs => greater mobilisation
including small-scale
Risks…- Environmental integrity - Achieving standardisation can be costly (data gathering)
Development and operationalisation of standardised approaches requires resources and coordination
- Selection of most appropriate project types and methodological concepts- Awareness-raising and capacity-building of project developers, NGOs and DNAs
Lessons learned
3
www.perspectives.cc · [email protected]
Guidelines (GL) SBL (EB 62): - Sector coverage: Transport is not covered- GL provides on a very high-level definitions and procedures- EB understanding of SBL seems to be limited to default factors/benchmarks- The GL does not provide methodologies, and content of GL is only a fraction of
required methodological work- Practical questions are not addressed
- How will the Board (or the submitting DNA?) determine and justify benchmark level and based on which criteria (transparency, conservativeness, etc)?
- What about methodology elements not addressed in the GL (e.g. applicability project emissions, leakage, etc)
- How do (or will) SBL relate to existing methodologies (will they simply replace BL/additionality elements of existing methodologies)
- If not, who is responsible for developing the “missing” elements for a full practically implementable methodology?
Procedures (EB 63, consideration)- Only applicable for DNA submissions and based on GL, approved meth or tool- New form for submission of SBLs- What are the criteria for assessment of adequacy of the SBL?
Comments on latest regulatory decision-making
4
www.perspectives.cc · [email protected] © 2011 Perspectives GmbH
Many Thanks for Your Attention!
Matthias Krey, Perspectives GmbH