Revision of HFC-23 methodology (Newsletter #4)

Again on CDM Watch’s agenda for the fourth 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 …

Non-additional projects under consideration at this meeting (Newsletter #4)

One fundamental flaw with the CDM is the need to prove the additionality of each project. A project is additional if it was built only because of the extra income from selling CERs – meaning that the project would not have happened if there was not extra CER income. If a project would happen anyway …

Calibrated bags to measure gas leakage (Newsletter #4)

The Board will decide upon revised methodology AM0023 concerning leak reduction from natural gas pipeline compressor or gate stations. The revision would expand the permitted techniques to measure the flow of gas leaks in natural gas transmission and distribution systems to two more techniques: (i)             the calibrated bags technique (ii)            the ultrasonic flow meters technique. …

Additionality testing differentiating between multinationals and local SMEs (Newsletter #4)

The EB will again tackle the assessment of additionality at its next meeting and will in particular discuss draft guidelines for objective demonstration and assessment of barriers. A barrier analysis requires demonstrating that barriers exist that would prevent the proposed project from being carried out if the project activity was not registered as a CDM …

Danger to set precedent when deciding about first-of-its kind threshold (Newsletter #4)

A project activity is assumed to be additional if no similar project has been implemented previously in a certain geographical area. If a project activity is “first-of-its- kind”, no additional assessment steps are undertaken to confirm additionality. As stated in the last CDM Watch newsletter, the application of this barrier is highly problematic as project …

Pressure by DOEs to limit their liability (Newsletter #4)

During the next meeting, the Board will consider the “concept of materiality”, which would limit the liability of DOEs for errors in checking data in PDDs and accompanying documents. In theory, DOEs are held responsible for any CER which may be inappropriately issued. In such cases, DOEs have to replace a corresponding amount of “valid” …

Subsidies for monoculture tree plantations (Newsletter #4)

Currently, any plantation established on land that was forested after 1 January 1990 is excluded from the CDM. But the CDM EB is now considering a new possibility to include lands with “forests in exhaustion” as A/R CDM project activities. The results will be presented in December 2009 at COP-15 in Copenhagen. The term forests …

CDM Watch Newsletter #4, October 2009

Dear friends,

Just after UNFCCC delegates have battled over the future of the CDM during Bangkok Climate Talks, the CDM Executive Board will meet from 13 – 16 October 2009 in Bangkok to discuss a number of important issues.

Bhilangana III Hydro Power Project: how 24 MW destroy 14 villages

The 24 MW Bhilangana – III Hydro Power Project is currently being established at the Bhilangana river, the tributaries of Bhagirathi River in the Tehri District in the State of Uttarakhand and has applied for CDM in January 2008. Further to some alarming hints by NGOs in Delhi, we visited the dam area. The findings …