National Office for Climate Change and Ozone Protection
1 / 27

The CDM: latest status of international rules and the CER market - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

National Office for Climate Change and Ozone Protection Hanoi, March 1, 2004. The CDM: latest status of international rules and the CER market. Axel Michaelowa Hamburg Institute of International Economics, Germany [email protected] Structure of presentation.

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' The CDM: latest status of international rules and the CER market' - gypsy

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

National Office for Climate Change and Ozone Protection

Hanoi, March 1, 2004

The CDM: latest status of international rules and the CER market

Axel Michaelowa

Hamburg Institute of International Economics, Germany

[email protected]

Structure of presentation

  • CDM rules

    • Methodology status

    • The unresolved additionality issue

  • The fragmented market

    • Competition between the mechanisms

    • Different domestic trading schemes

    • The EU linking directive

  • Share of CERs in total project revenue

  • Important stakeholders

  • Chances for Vietnam

Steps of international climate policy

“Russian doll“ structure of agreements:

Cdm valve
CDM ”valve“

Emissions trading






Tropical air?

Country 1

Kyoto commitment

Country 2

Kyoto commitment

The CDM maze



3 members can propose revision within 15 days to be donewithin 30 days


2% adap-tation tax


Baseline and monitoring methodologies


Executive Board

(10 members)

decides on new rules within 4 months






develo-ping countries



20 applications:

10 Europe

6 Japan

2 US

2 Asia

comment new rules within 8 weeks


spot checks

Certifier (OE)

3 members propose revision within 8 weeks






comment within 30 days




Project design document:




Methodology if first of its kind

Monitoring report


Project partners


orfor-warding of new metho-dology







Involved countries

Project partners

Involved countries


Baseline principles

a) old coal fired power station 1200 g CO2/kWh.

b) gas turbine 450 g CO2/kWh

c) 850 g CO2/kWh

Case law and path dependency

  • The EB does not provide a basic set of rules beyond the Marrakech Accords text

    • Exception: small scale projects

  • All rules are developed by case law

  • Project pioneers have to propose a new rule (“methodology”) for each new project type

    • Higher validation costs

    • Delay of several months

    • Risk of refusal

  • The CDM regime is shaped by first proposers

  • Important role of validators, methodology panel and expert reviewers

Stringent decisions on baseline

methodologies enhance quality

Passed methodologies

are very project-specific

Submissions of baseline

methodologies: types

Submitted baseline methodologies

  • Multiple methodologies for same project type?

Approved baseline methodologies

Rang Dong

  • Multiple methodologies for same project type!

  • EB starts consolidation/standardisation

The eb s additionality tests

10th session of CDM EB states:

As part of [...] determining the baseline scenario an explanation shall be made of how, through the use of the methodology, it can be demonstrated that a project activity is additional and therefore not the baseline scenario.

The EB‘s additionality tests

  • Flow-chart / series of questions that lead to a narrowing of potential project options

  • Qualitative / quantitative assessment of different potential options and an indication of why the non-project option is more likely

  • Qualitative /quantitative assessment of one or more barriers facing the proposed project activity

  • Project type is not common practice in the proposed area of implementation, and not required by recent/pending legislation/regulations

Additionality tests - not comparable

  • Flow-chart / series of questions

    • Stringency depends on type of questions. Essentially no test, but could be framework for test

  • Why is the non-project option more likely?

    • Should essentially be the outcome of all tests applied, is no test in itself

  • Barrier assessment

    • The key issue is how important barriers are

  • Project type not common practice and not required by legislation

    • Only test which is objective, but does only specify necessary, not sufficient conditions for additionality. Still needs another test.

Stringency of tests

  • Series of questions: Unpredictable

    • Does question address the real barriers?

    • How will answers be evaluated?

      • Example from latest hydropower methodology

  • Barrier test: Level of barrier counts

    • There will be some barrier for every project. Otherwise everybody would start projects every day. The crucial issue is when a barrier would prevent a project (“decisive” barrier) developed by a capable developer. Can we capture this objectively? What level of barrier is decisive for project decision?

Current demand on the CDM and JI market (million $)

  • Pure CDM demand: about 600 million $, i.e. about 150 million t at current prices of 3-5 $/t CO2

  • Price differentiation according to quality?

The EU as driver of the CDM market

  • Decisions are taken jointly by Council of Ministers and European Parliament

  • Council position, January 2004

    • No reference to entry into force of Kyoto Protocol

    • CERs accepted from 2005; conversion 1:1

    • Cap and sinks competence of member states

  • EP environment committee position, Jan. 2004

    • Hydro > 20 MW only under WCD criteria

    • CERs from 2005

    • Linking with schemes in non-ratifying countries

    • Cap at 50% of necessary reductions

EU as CDM leader

  • Negotiations Council - Parliament, April 2004

    • Likely: exchange of cap against limits of sinks

    • The survival of the Kyoto Mechanisms without Kyoto entry into force is guaranteed

    • Adoption of linking directive will spur private demand for CDM

  • Market impact

    • Depends on national allocation plans. UK plan is strong, Austrian, Dutch and German likely to be weak

    • Depends on government CER / ERU import regulations / fees









Energy Eff.-District Heating

~ 2.0

Gas Flare Reduction




Municipal Solid Waste


Impact of carbon finance on project revenues at 3 €/t CO2

Source: PCF 2003

The role of financial institutions

  • Packaging projects

    • Development of project pipelines

    • Portfolio generation

  • Financing projects

    • Project finance

    • Venture capital

    • Special mutual funds

    • Corporate finance

    • Lending

  • Bringing in expertise in checking viability of a project proposal

    • Due diligence

  • Insurance


Source: Janssen 2001

Important stakeholders

  • Policymakers

    • Develop a CDM strategy

      • Priority sectors

      • SD criteria

      • Outreach

  • Get DNA operational

    • Decide on competences /rules

    • Decide on resources. Fees?

  • DNA staff

    • Ability to make objective decisions

    • Ability to market host country

Private sector

  • Project developers

    • Understand CDM incentive

    • Understand principles of CDM rules

    • Understand differences between technologies

  • Consultants

    • Understand CDM and are able to find their niche

    • Become able to deliver high-quality service according to CDM rules

    • Network with Annex B buyers /investors

Chances and challenges for Vietnam

  • Institutional homework done

    • Kyoto ratified, DNA set up

  • Interesting potential in several sectors

    • Gas flaring reduction

    • Renewable energy

      • Agricultural wastes

      • Hydro

    • Industrial energy efficiency

    • Forestry

  • Private sector remains to be integrated

  • Transparent rules for project approval remain to be defined

Thank you!Further [email protected]