1 / 9

WP 2 : Technology transfer in the CDM TETRIS PROJECT TEAM MEETING

WP 2 : Technology transfer in the CDM TETRIS PROJECT TEAM MEETING. 21 June 2006, Amsterdam Frauke Haake, Heleen de Coninck. Registered projects under the CDM. As of 1st January 2006 63 projects total of 28 MtCO 2 -eq per year In the meantime number has risen to more than 200 projects

kovit
Download Presentation

WP 2 : Technology transfer in the CDM TETRIS PROJECT TEAM MEETING

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. WP 2 : Technology transfer in the CDMTETRIS PROJECT TEAM MEETING 21 June 2006, Amsterdam Frauke Haake, Heleen de Coninck

  2. Registered projects under the CDM • As of 1st January 2006 • 63 projects • total of 28 MtCO2-eq per year • In the meantime • number has risen to more than 200 projects • Around 100 MtCO2-eq per year • Analysis outdated but still relevant • No significant new technologies introduced in the expanded project portfolio

  3. Decreasing data certainty Results on technology transfer in the CDM • Same criteria as WP5 on Joint Implementation: • Country origin of technology • Data origin: PDDs, contact with project developers • Possibilities: European Union, Host country, Other countries (Japan, USA, etc), No data • New or improved technology • Looking at current technologies used in host countries • Based on PDD, independent data on the country conditions • Capacity building or knowledge transfer • Based on PDD and expert judgment

  4. Technologies used - GHG reduction

  5. Technologies used - Number of projects

  6. Technology transfer - origin of technology • LFG: mainly Netherlands • N2O reduction: mainly from France • HFC-23 destruction: Japan, the UK and Germany • Methane capture: host country • Hydropower: diverse origins: Spain, France, Japan, Switzerland and the United States and host countries • Wind energy: Spain and Denmark • Bio-energy: host country

  7. Technology transfer - new or improved

  8. Technology transfer - capacity building/knowledge transfer

  9. Conclusion • Technology mostly from either the EU or the host country. • Over one third of the projects uses technology from EU • Especially technologies in the non-CO2 greenhouse gases and some renewable energy technologies appear to have been exported. • Much of the technology is locally produced, mainly in bio-energy, thermal/efficiency and some hydropower and landfill gas projects. • In almost 60% of the projects, new or improved technology is used • Capacity building or knowledge transfer appears to have taken place in almost half of the projects • Technology transfer takes place more in projects that reduce non-CO2 greenhouse gases rather than in renewable energy and energy efficiency projects. The exception is wind energy.

More Related