Search
Close this search box.

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 submitted almost 2 years 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

Going for green: Is the Paris Olympics winning the race against the climate clock?

Aware of the impact of the games on the climate and of record temperatures on the games, organisers of the Paris games have pledged to break records when it comes to reducing the impact of this mega event on the planet. ‘Going for Green’, a Carbon Market Watch and éclaircies report assessing the credibility of these plans reveals that if completely implemented, only 30% of the expected carbon footprint is covered by a robust climate strategy.

Lost in Documentation

Navigating the maze of project documentation

A new report by Carbon Market Watch has raised concerns over a lack of transparency and accountability within the unregulated voluntary carbon market caused by the unavailability of important project documents from the four biggest carbon crediting standards.

Join our mailing list

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