1 / 17

CDM baseline standardization – key policy questions Axel Michaelowa

CDM baseline standardization – key policy questions Axel Michaelowa Center for Comparative and International Studies (CIS), University of Zurich and ETH Zurich; Perspectives axel.michaelowa@pw.uzh.ch , michaelowa@perspectives.cc Joint Workshop , Bonn, March 13, 2011.

koen
Download Presentation

CDM baseline standardization – key policy questions Axel Michaelowa

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CDM baseline standardization – key policy questions Axel Michaelowa Center for Comparative and International Studies (CIS), University of Zurich and ETH Zurich; Perspectives axel.michaelowa@pw.uzh.ch, michaelowa@perspectives.cc Joint Workshop, Bonn, March 13, 2011

  2. Harnessing emissions reduction potential CDM  CDM  CDM  CDM  CDM  CDM  CDM  Potential 2030, bottom-up studies Source: IPCC (2007)

  3. Preventing emissions take-off Critical level of HDI Source: Michaelowa and Michaelowa (2009)

  4. What can be standardized? • Use of pre-defined values / parameters applicable to many projects at once • Baseline setting • Additionality determination • Criteria, emission factors, calculation methods, equations, models feeding into baseline methodologies • Across project types • E.g. all electricity related projects • Within individual project types • E.g. benchmark for N2O from adipic acid

  5. Why standardization? • Administrative improvements to the CDM: • Increased efficiency of registration process • Greater objectivity, consistency and predictability • Reduced transaction costs • Increased project flow • Broader systemic improvements: • Guaranteeing and improving environmental integrity • Improved distribution across host countries and project types • Trade-offs between these goals?? • Careful implementation and regulatory oversight !

  6. Potential risks • Subjectivity is not really eliminated, but shifted from project registration process to the baseline setting stage • One off decision, difficult to reverse • Gaming with standard setting can lock in too lenient baselines / non-conservative parameters • High costs for public administrations, especially if frequent updating • Aggregation level is crucial • Too high: risk for environmental integrity, and of reaching all mitigation potential • Too low: data confidentiality issues

  7. Types of standards • Emissions intensity benchmarks (add. /bl.) • X t CO2 / amount of product or service • Homogeneous products, large number of entities, normal performance distribution • Technology / practice standards (add./bl.) • Average of top X % performance • Reference technology that is common practice • Project technology that is highly innovative • Market penetration rates (add.) • X percentage of installed capacity • Economies of scale and learning are important • Model (add/bl)

  8. Types of standards II • Deemed savings defaults (emission reduction) • X t CO2 reduced per installation and year • Requires good understanding of usage patterns • Utilization defaults (add.) • X % plant load factor / x hours average daily use • Limited variability of parameters influencing plant load factor • Positive lists (add.) • Technology • Applicable if no other revenues than CERs or if technology clearly faces a cost gap to alternative technologies providing the same service

  9. Key issues for benchmarks Type of benchmark Updating frequency Aggregation level Stringency level e.g tCO2 / t output Process? Product or service? Vintage? Geographic area? Average? Best 20%? Best used? Best available? Fixed improvement factor? According to data?

  10. Decision on stringency Emission intensity (tCO2 / t output) C Plants B A D Baseline benchmark CERs Additionality benchmark    

  11. Greenfield vs brownfield

  12. Vintages count!

  13. Technology shifts

  14. Benchmark development

  15. Benchmark development II

  16. Policy questions • Which sectors and project types should be prioritized for standardization? • Highly homogeneous, large-scale industries? • Small, dispersed emissions sources? • How stringent should standardized approaches be to guarantee a sufficiently high environmental integrity? • More stringent than project-based approaches? • Role of experts? • What lessons can be drawn from existing use of standardization in offset programmes? • US programmes (CAR, RGGI, CCX)

  17. Policy questions • Who should administer and develop standardized methodologies? • CDM EB? • Project developers? • Should there be a Baseline Standard rulebook? • How can we prioritize countries and regions? • Underrepresented regions? • Regions with highest potential? • How can DNAs be enabled to decide whether to apply standardized baselines? • Capacity building required • Can distortions be prevented?

More Related