Revision of HFC-23 methodology still ignored by the Board (Newsletter #3)

Again on CDM Watch’s agenda for the third consecutive Newsletter is the issue of HFC-23 methodology AM0001. The Swiss non-governmental organization Noe21 submitted a request for revision of the methodology AM0001 for HFC-23 destruction to the Board in December 2007. The revision request aims to address perverse incentives in this methodology. Although the request was submitted 20 months ago and despite several requests by Noe21 and CDM Watch to consider this issue, the Board has so far neglected to act. Continuous phone calls to the EB Secretariat have just resulted in information that a response will be sent in the coming days. CDM Watch urges the Board to formally consider this request now as a matter of priority.

HFC-23 is an unwanted by-product in the production of HCFC-22, a refrigerant and temporary substitute to CFCs. The HFC-23 has a Global Warming Potential 11’700 times higher than CO2. Its destruction in HCFC-22 plants in developing countries can be registered as a CDM project and leads to the issuance of a large amount of credits. As it is very cheap to install a destruction facility, CDM projects have resulted in huge windfall profits for HCFC-22 plants as well as a perverse incentive to artificially stimulate the production of HCFC-22.

Action to be taken by the Board: The Board should ask its Methodological Panel to consider the request and to prepare a recommendation.

Author

Related posts

Carbon Market Watch welcomes EU ban on “carbon neutrality” greenwashing

Companies selling in the European Union will no longer be able to claim that their products are carbon or climate neutral, the EU has provisionally agreed. This victory against greenwashing corresponds to longstanding demands from climate campaigners to eliminate the use of offsets and send a signal to the voluntary carbon market.

Integrity Council’s rulebook sets minimum threshold instead of high bar for carbon markets

The Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market’s latest guidelines provide a set of much-needed incremental improvements but fail to raise the quality of carbon credits sufficiently and leave too much wiggle room to truly tackle the climate crisis. The ICVCM has the opportunity to clear up the loopholes and ambiguities when it issues its first assessments of carbon market programmes.

Revision of HFC-23 methodology still ignored by the Board (Newsletter #3)

Join our mailing list

Stay in touch and receive our monthly newsletter, campaign updates, event invites and more.