Concepts & country specific strategies for the post-2012 carbon market

Concepts and country specific strategies for the post-2012 carbon market

BMUB Side Event: Market Based Mechanisms –

Taking stock of the portfolio and looking

towards new instruments

Carbon Expo 2014, Cologne

Carsten Warnecke

29.05.2014

© ECOFYS | |

Content

Interim results of research project:

“Concepts and country specific strategies

for the post-2012 carbon market”

> CDM portfolio analysis

> Duration: Aug 2013 – Sept 2015

> Partner: TÜV SÜD

This presentation:

> Background

> Objectives

> Approach

> First Insights

29.05.2014 Carsten Warnecke

© ECOFYS | |

Background

> Lack of international ambition and record lows in CER demand

lead to substantial challenges for CDM projects

– Implemented projects may no longer be able to cover their

operational costs and/or transaction costs

– Projects might not be implemented, shut down or modified for

continuation outside the CDM

> Results in loss of human capacity and trust

> Ongoing decoupling from the international regime complicates

transfer in future systems

> Existing project-based mitigation activities are individually

threatened

> Efficient and effective support requires tailored approaches


© ECOFYS | |

Objectives

> Empirical analysis of the situation and current decision-making

processes of CDM project activities

> Creation of a previously not existing source of information on the

level of project-types and host countries

> Basis with great value for type-specific conclusions and

recommendations

> Identification of circumstances under which projects are dis-

continued and fall back to the pre-CDM situation (emitting GHG)

> Identification of impacts by already existing or emerging national

or international support and policy schemes

> Disclosure of projects which could be reactivated or continued

> Input to concepts and country specific strategies for further

cooperation with regards to international carbon markets


© ECOFYS | |

Approach


Output:

Conclusions &

Recommendations

Definition of population

(countries & project types)

Selection of project cases (sampling)

Compilation of project status

database / Questionnaire

Status inquiry / evaluation of projects (Analysis of data sources, direct

communication, secondary contacts)

In-country trips / on-side

verification

Analysis

Establishing a contact

database

Periodic evaluation phases

∑ > 7,000 projects 1,311 projects for evaluation

=> 5,682 projects in population

© ECOFYS | |

Approach

> Stratified sampling for technologies and host countries

> Desk-research of publicly available information

> Status inquiry / evaluation of projects in the sample via

– Web-based questionnaires (English, Spanish, Chinese)

– Telephone interviews

– Full evaluation started in March

> Starting points are Focal Point Entities for CDM projects

– Often outdated or incomplete

– Significant reduction in staff

– ERPA terminated no updated MOC

> Manual closing of gaps with initial PDD contact details and further

research

> Inquiries involve all relevant stakeholders (developer, buyer,

consultants, DOEs, DNAs)


© ECOFYS | |

First insights

> Caution should be taken in the interpretation of the data

presented

> Current data cannot be representative for the entire sample

> Most active projects answer first while confirmation for inactive

projects is difficult to get

> This early stage of the evaluation does not allow an accurate

analysis (35% completed)

> High quality and completeness of responses

> Current response rate differs per country and technology type and

is up to 75%


Who has provided the data?

© ECOFYS | |

What share of projects is up and running?


67% of responding projects are still or already fully implemented

81% of implemented projects claim to be in regular operation Corresponding to ~55% of responding projects

> Expectation that the share of implemented and operational projects

remains the same or slightly increases (12 months period)

© ECOFYS | |

How do projects react to the current situation?


Changes to the verification & issuance approach?

> 14% of projects have stopped an operating monitoring system

(hydro 3%; LFG 20%)

© ECOFYS | |

Why do project activities continue?

> Various reasons beyond CER revenues

> Only 22% state having their initial ERPA

> Almost 50% stated to have stopped CER marketing or don‘t know

how to marketing CERs currently


Despite the recent drop in CER prices, what are the reasons to continue with the CDM GHG mitigation activity?

© ECOFYS | |

Support


What type of immediate support is required for project continuation in addition to financial support?

What type of support has the GHG mitigation project received on national level?

© ECOFYS | |

…

> … no conclusions yet

> The analysis is ongoing

> Thanks to all that contributed already

> Good chance for stakeholders and participants to draw the real

picture and create attention to the real needs of the market


© ECOFYS | |

Thank you.

Ecofys:

Carsten Warnecke

Contact:

[email protected]

More information at

http://www.ecofys.com/en/project/

evaluating-the-state-of-cdm-

projects/


mailto:[email protected]



http://www.ecofys.com/en/project/evaluating-the-state-of-cdm-projects/














Concepts & country specific strategies for the post-2012 carbon market

Technology

Transcript of Concepts & country specific strategies for the post-2012 carbon market