The CDM is Taken Apart
Here at Poznan, the Clean Development Mechanism, CDM, is being taken apart. Sounds like good news you say? Well... It is taken apart in the sense that the reforms to the current CDM are being discussed here in Poznan, and the future of the CDM, post 2012, will only be discussed next year. This means that for now, we have to do with incremental changes to the governing structure of the mechanism, but bigger changes to the fundamental principles of the CDM have to wait until next year. Which gives us room for campaigning and hope, I guess.
Or time for despair - however you see it. When I started reading the options for reforming the CDM, as contained in the Note by the Chair of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Further Commitments for Annexe I Countries Under the Kyoto Protocol, I was shocked. Ok, I had not expected the Chair of the CDM working group to suggest that the CDM should be replaced by another mechanism that forces industrialized countries to reduce emissions at home and support sustainable development in the South, but I had hoped for some paths in this direction. At first, I couldn't really find many, I am afraid. At the very top of the list, in Annexe 1 of the text, we have the suggestion to include forests in the CDM, just underneath, we have the suggestion to include carbon capture and storage projects. But wait, this is not the end of the list, it gets better: nukes. The relevant option in the nukes paragraph reads: "Activities relating to new nuclear facilities may be registered under the CDM."
I guess they wanted to put the most controversial things on top of the list, the rest reads more benign, and gives some small, tiny reasons for hope. Some of the fundamental concerns many NGOs have with the CDM, that this mechanism does in fact allow industrialized countries to continue to emit greenhouse gases while financing projects in the South that would have been built anyway and therefore do not reduce emissions on a global scale, are being addressed in the three following options in the paper:
* sectoral-crediting with no-lose targets.
These targets would have to be ambitious - well below business as usual targets. This system would require funds to help reduce emissions to the target level.
* Assessing additionality through multi-project baselines.
At the moment, additionality is assessed project-by-project, and the auditors are failing miserably, because investment decisions are inherently subjective. This idea suggests that one would look at many projects to assess additionality, and not just at one. This could increase the objectivity of the additionality tool.
* Development of a positive list.
Positive lists, containing projects that would be eligible for the CDM, could be done country-specific and only include projects with a high likelyhood of being additional and of contributing to sustainable development. Projects not on the list would automatically not be eligible for the CDM in a specific country.
These three suggestions represent the best ideas coming out of the official climate negotiations for reform of the CDM after 2012. But I am very sceptical whether their introduction would solve the fundamental problems of offsetting and the CDM, as Barbara describes in this audio-slideshow.
We know that in order to reduce emissions globally, industrialized countries have two obligations: to reduce emissions at home and to support clean energy projects in the South. With the CDM, the one objective is traded off against the other, and no objective is achieved. The mechanism is being used as a loophole for industrialized countries to avoid emissions and does also not support clean energy projects, but instead large hydro in China.
In the coming days, we will talk to the various country delegations to find out more about their positions on the future of the CDM. We will continue pushing for funds for clean energy projects and policies in the South and clear emission reductions targets in the North. Stay tuned...
.
