Definition of swing plants to decide over the fate of a HFC recovery and destruction project (Newsletter #5)

During this meeting, the Board will decide on applicability conditions of methodology AM0001 for HFC-23 destruction that will ultimately decide whether the Mexican Quimobásicos HFC Recovery and Destruction Project can be registered as a CDM project activity.

Some HCFC-22 production plants can produce both CFCs and HCFC-22, like the Quimobásicos HFC Recovery and Destruction Project. Therefore, COP/MOP also allowed including CFC production in the calculation of the cap on crediting. The pending question is now for how long plants must have produced HCFC-22 regardless of the CFC production in the period from 2002 to 2004 to consider them really as swing plant as required in methodology AM0001. (see clarification request CLA0164)

CDM Watch believes that a plant which did not produce HCFC-22 in all three historical years on a regular basis should not be considered a swing plant. For example, in the case of test production, where HCFC-22 is only produced at rare occasions, it is difficult to argue that this is a swing plant.

Action to be taken by the Board: The Board should clarify the request from the Meth Panel 42 (paragraph 14) that HCFC-22 must have been produced in all three historical years 2002, 2003 and 2004 for commercial purposes.

Author

Related posts

COP28: Article 6 failure avoids a worse outcome 

Torn between countries demanding that Article 6 carbon markets be available with virtually no restrictions and countries insisting on upholding transparency, human rights, and climate ambition, negotiators at COP28 failed to break the deadlock. With all the unresolved problematic issues, the fact that they reached no deal was better than agreeing to a bad one that would torpedo the Paris Agreement.

Join our mailing list

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