The decision by the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market (ICVCM) to withhold its stamp of approval from the most problematic cookstove methodologies and to approve a good methodology is a welcome step in the right direction but more needs to be done.
Last week, the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market ICVCM announced its long-awaited decision on cookstove methodologies – an announcement closely watched by stakeholders in global carbon markets.
Efficient cookstove projects can result in enormous social and environmental benefits. However, when these projects are translated into carbon credits their climate benefits have too often been greatly overstated, a previously identified trend that is confirmed by research we will release next month.
For this reason, the ICVCM’s decision to reject the problematic legacy cookstoves methodologies developed under the Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism is a promising development.
These include methodologies covering the switch from non-renewable biomass (AMS-I.E) and enhancing the energy efficiency of non-renewable biomass (AMS-II.G). The ICVCM has also rejected the Gold Standard simplified methodology for clean and efficient cookstoves.
Declining these methodologies for which there is clear evidence of severe over-crediting in global carbon credit markets is a step in the right direction. The ICVCM’s decision to conditionally attribute the Gold Standard methodology for Metered and Measured Energy Cooking Devices with their sought-after Core Carbon Principles (CCP) label sends a positive signal since this methodology is among the most robust out there. Nevertheless, the conditional approval of other cookstove and biodigester methodologies (GS-TPDDTEC and VM0050) fails to take account of other over-crediting factors.
Missing the (bench)mark
Since 2021, the ICVCM has been striving to establish a global benchmark for integrity in carbon trading, by testing methodologies and awarding its Core Carbon Principles label to those that meet its standards.
Recently, however, the ICVCM has faced criticism for approving controversial REDD+ and other methodologies that, according to experts advising the ICVCM, failed to meet its own stated criteria. This decision led to key departures from ICVCM’s expert panel, further intensifying scrutiny over its latest move.
Cookstove projects are the fastest-growing segment in the voluntary carbon market, offering significant socioeconomic benefits for communities reliant on traditional biomass fuels, such as wood. Yet, many methodologies in this category are heavily over-crediting, allowing buyers to make misleading carbon-neutral claims based on little more than hot air. The ICVCM’s stamp of approval on cookstove methodologies is a high-stakes decision. Handled correctly, it could drive the scaling up of efficient cookstove projects but also weed out projects that are overstating their climate benefits.
The implications go beyond day-to-day carbon trading. The ICVCM’s credibility also affects the perception of Article 6 of the Paris Agreement. Notably, the first ever credits to be issued under the Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism, supposedly a high-quality benchmark mechanism for international carbon credits, will be from an AMS-II.G project that would fail to meet the CCP label standard.
Summary of ICVCM decision and CMW’s recommendations
Rejected: AMS-II.G, AMS-I.E and GS simplified
These methodologies significantly over-credited, with AMS-II.G and GS simplified being the worst offenders, according to research by Gill Wiehl and her team. Rejecting them was a smart decision. As the ICVCM explains, “These older methodologies either lacked best practice measurement methods or demonstrably effective controls on avoiding potential overestimation from fuel savings or technology usage.”
Conditionally approved: GS metered, GS-TPDDTEC, VM0050
Three methodologies received the CCP stamp, each subject to conditions set by the ICVCM. These conditions address three key factories: the fraction of non-renewable biomass (fNRB) value, the emissions from charcoal, and methods to establish fuel consumption volumes.
- GS Metered stands out as a high-quality methodology, making its certification with the new condition on fNRB a positive outcome. Under this methodology, fuel use is measured or metered, and other important quality criteria are fulfilled by default. With the added requirement to use science-based fNRB values, GS Metered upholds the highest integrity among all approved methodologies and deserves the CCP label.
GS-TPDDTEC and VM0050 are significantly improved, but there are still some loopholes that aren’t addressed in the conditions by the ICVCM. We base our recommendations below on the Gill-Wiehl study mentioned above and recent conversations with the team at The Berkeley Carbon Trading Project.
- GS-TPDDTEC exhibited the third biggest over-crediting numbers according to Gill-Wiehl. The ICVCMs decision to mandate science-based fraction of non-renewable biomass (fNRB) values and conservative conversion factors from charcoal to firewood (or direct emission factors for charcoal) will significantly decrease the over-crediting. However, there are three areas of improvement that should not be neglected:
- Adoption rates should be addressed with accuracy, rigour or conservativeness. As is recommended by the Berkeley Carbon Trading Project, adoption levels should be monitored using rigorous longitudinal studies, stove use monitors, or a value of 58% derived from the literature should be applied to account for the level of drop outs.
- For usage rates, a deduction should be made, and stacking rates should be increased by a corresponding amount to account for a scenario where households use the project cookstove more because they are observed during a KPT (Hawthorne effect).
- Fuel consumption values should realistically range between 2-4 MJ per capita per day of delivered energy. Right now, there is no such mandate for project and baseline fuel consumption values.
- VM0050 is a methodology developed by Verra. This methodology is also positively affected by the ICVCM condition to use science-based fNRB values.
- For usage rates, a deduction should be made, and stacking rates should be increased by a corresponding amount to account for a scenario where households use the project cookstove more because they are observed during a KPT (Hawthorne effect).
Adoption rates should be monitored using stove use monitors, conservative literature values of 58%, or longitudinal surveys. The ICVCM is aware of the existing survey biases and should mandate the recommendations formulated by the Berkeley Carbon Trading Project.
