Comments on: 6 Days in 2012: Effect of the CDM on Carbon Emissions http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4355 Wed, 29 Jul 2009 22:36:51 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Mark Bahner http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4355&cpage=1#comment-9595 Mark Bahner Sat, 29 Mar 2008 21:45:37 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=4355#comment-9595 "I understand that a substantial portion of projects are methane capture. This is win-win, and hardly absurd. Why is this NOT a good way to foster development, economic resilience and adaption in developing countries?" Methane capture is not absurd. But, per wonderful Wikipedia, about 58% of the total CDM credits to date have been for HFCs (predominantly HFC-23): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_Development_Mechanism According to Wikipedia, a representative of the IPCC says that loophole has (finally) been closed. But that certainly was absurd (if destruction of the ozone layer can be counted as absurd), because it greatly encouraged production of HCFC-22: http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/2007/05/the_land_of_unintended_consequ_1.html “I understand that a substantial portion of projects are methane capture. This is win-win, and hardly absurd. Why is this NOT a good way to foster development, economic resilience and adaption in developing countries?”

Methane capture is not absurd. But, per wonderful Wikipedia, about 58% of the total CDM credits to date have been for HFCs (predominantly HFC-23):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_Development_Mechanism

According to Wikipedia, a representative of the IPCC says that loophole has (finally) been closed. But that certainly was absurd (if destruction of the ozone layer can be counted as absurd), because it greatly encouraged production of HCFC-22:

http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/2007/05/the_land_of_unintended_consequ_1.html

]]> By: TokyoTom http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4355&cpage=1#comment-9594 TokyoTom Sat, 29 Mar 2008 15:24:53 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=4355#comment-9594 ""The mechanism is somewhat absurd." This seems about right." The mechanism has helped foster less carbon-intensive development in the third world and has been welcomed by them. I understand that a substantial portion of projects are methane capture. This is win-win, and hardly absurd. Why is this NOT a good way to foster development, economic resilience and adaption in developing countries? You occasionally profess to be interested in adaptation in the developing world, Roger. By what mechanisms do you poropose to aid in that process? Would any resemble CDM? Sorry for the theoretical questions. “”The mechanism is somewhat absurd.” This seems about right.”

The mechanism has helped foster less carbon-intensive development in the third world and has been welcomed by them. I understand that a substantial portion of projects are methane capture. This is win-win, and hardly absurd. Why is this NOT a good way to foster development, economic resilience and adaption in developing countries?

You occasionally profess to be interested in adaptation in the developing world, Roger. By what mechanisms do you poropose to aid in that process? Would any resemble CDM?

Sorry for the theoretical questions.

]]> By: Roger Pielke, Jr. http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4355&cpage=1#comment-9593 Roger Pielke, Jr. Mon, 24 Mar 2008 13:02:39 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=4355#comment-9593 eo- Can you share your work? The assumptions that you use matter, but my calculations indicate that under any assumptions the delay in global emissions by Kyoto would be measured in years not days. Tom- It is hard to respond to your point since it is entirely theoretical. I still fail to see the connection to adaptation, sorry. Rafa- "The mechanism is somewhat absurd." This seems about right. eo- Can you share your work? The assumptions that you use matter, but my calculations indicate that under any assumptions the delay in global emissions by Kyoto would be measured in years not days.

Tom- It is hard to respond to your point since it is entirely theoretical. I still fail to see the connection to adaptation, sorry.

Rafa- “The mechanism is somewhat absurd.” This seems about right.

]]> By: rafa http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4355&cpage=1#comment-9592 rafa Mon, 24 Mar 2008 09:11:04 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=4355#comment-9592 Dear Roger, according with the EU law there's a limit for the CO2 emissions reduction based on the CDM. The CDM is basically used to emit "more". If you run a company the EU, through your country government, allocates you X tons of CO2 emissions. You can emit X+ Delta assuming the Delta is done through the CDM (is supposed to be audited, I doubt it can be done). The current limit for Delta through CDM is 20,58% of the total emissions allocated for your company. So there's a limit to the effectiveness of the CDM at least in Europe. The mechanism is somewhat absurd. Spanish company A plans to build a eolic power plant in, let's say, Ecuador. They're going to build the plant anyway. However company A can claim in front of the government of Spain that they can emit in Spain a Delta because there was a reduction in Ecuador. best Dear Roger, according with the EU law there’s a limit for the CO2 emissions reduction based on the CDM. The CDM is basically used to emit “more”. If you run a company the EU, through your country government, allocates you X tons of CO2 emissions. You can emit X+ Delta assuming the Delta is done through the CDM (is supposed to be audited, I doubt it can be done). The current limit for Delta through CDM is 20,58% of the total emissions allocated for your company. So there’s a limit to the effectiveness of the CDM at least in Europe. The mechanism is somewhat absurd. Spanish company A plans to build a eolic power plant in, let’s say, Ecuador. They’re going to build the plant anyway. However company A can claim in front of the government of Spain that they can emit in Spain a Delta because there was a reduction in Ecuador.

best

]]> By: TokyoTom http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4355&cpage=1#comment-9591 TokyoTom Mon, 24 Mar 2008 05:18:39 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=4355#comment-9591 Roger, sorry for not being clearer about my point. While the CDM has very little direct connection to adaptation (a portion of CDM credits are allocated to fund adaptation), the CDM has been a mechanism to draw developing countries into doing something themselves about climate change and about building international infrastructure that will also be essential to prioritizing, approving and funding adaptation investments. As whatever lessons there are to be learned in diagnosing the flaws of CDM and JI can be directly applied to the framework for international investment in adaptation projects, it is in this context that I am puzzled that you do not seem interested in further exploring the relevance of CDM and how it might be improved. Regards, \ Tom Roger, sorry for not being clearer about my point. While the CDM has very little direct connection to adaptation (a portion of CDM credits are allocated to fund adaptation), the CDM has been a mechanism to draw developing countries into doing something themselves about climate change and about building international infrastructure that will also be essential to prioritizing, approving and funding adaptation investments.

As whatever lessons there are to be learned in diagnosing the flaws of CDM and JI can be directly applied to the framework for international investment in adaptation projects, it is in this context that I am puzzled that you do not seem interested in further exploring the relevance of CDM and how it might be improved.

Regards,
\
Tom

]]> By: eo http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4355&cpage=1#comment-9590 eo Sat, 22 Mar 2008 05:46:34 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=4355#comment-9590 The Kyoto Protocol called for reduction between 6 to 8 per cent of identified greenhouse gases in countries listed in Annex B of the Protocol from their 1990 emissions. (Note: not all greenhouse gases are controlled by the Protocol). At 7 per cent redctions, this amounts to 26 days of greenhouse in Annex B countries based on 1990 levels and approximately 16 days worldwide. The carbon dioxide reduction from CDM of 6.5 days is not really insignificant when compared to the overall reduction target of the Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto Protocol called for reduction between 6 to 8 per cent of identified greenhouse gases in countries listed in Annex B of the Protocol from their 1990 emissions. (Note: not all greenhouse gases are controlled by the Protocol). At 7 per cent redctions, this amounts to 26 days of greenhouse in Annex B countries based on 1990 levels and approximately 16 days worldwide. The carbon dioxide reduction from CDM of 6.5 days is not really insignificant when compared to the overall reduction target of the Kyoto Protocol.

]]> By: eo http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4355&cpage=1#comment-9589 eo Sat, 22 Mar 2008 05:46:12 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=4355#comment-9589 The Kyoto Protocol called for reduction between 6 to 8 per cent of identified greenhouse gases in countries listed in Annex B of the Protocol from their 1990 emissions. (Note: not all greenhouse gases are controlled by the Protocol). At 7 per cent redctions, this amounts to 26 days of greenhouse in Annex B countries based on 1990 levels and approximately 16 days worldwide. The carbon dioxide reduction from CDM of 6.5 days is not really insignificant when compared to the overall reduction target of the Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto Protocol called for reduction between 6 to 8 per cent of identified greenhouse gases in countries listed in Annex B of the Protocol from their 1990 emissions. (Note: not all greenhouse gases are controlled by the Protocol). At 7 per cent redctions, this amounts to 26 days of greenhouse in Annex B countries based on 1990 levels and approximately 16 days worldwide. The carbon dioxide reduction from CDM of 6.5 days is not really insignificant when compared to the overall reduction target of the Kyoto Protocol.

]]> By: Roger Pielke, Jr. http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4355&cpage=1#comment-9588 Roger Pielke, Jr. Fri, 21 Mar 2008 11:20:49 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=4355#comment-9588 Tom- The CDM has nothing to do with adaptation. The role of the CDM in sustainable development is an important question, on which you will find different views, such as: http://www.thecornerhouse.org.uk/summary.shtml?x=556330 Tom- The CDM has nothing to do with adaptation.

The role of the CDM in sustainable development is an important question, on which you will find different views, such as:

http://www.thecornerhouse.org.uk/summary.shtml?x=556330

]]> By: TokyoTom http://cstpr.colorado.edu/prometheus/?p=4355&cpage=1#comment-9587 TokyoTom Fri, 21 Mar 2008 03:20:52 +0000 http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/prometheusreborn/?p=4355#comment-9587 The CDM has provided a useful mechanism for combining development with reductions in GHG intensity, for enhancing cooperation between north and south and improving governance infrastructure in developing nations. What's your alternative proposal for funding adaptation in the developing world, Roger - shall we simply throw money at them without any effort to ensure effectiveness? The CDM has provided a useful mechanism for combining development with reductions in GHG intensity, for enhancing cooperation between north and south and improving governance infrastructure in developing nations. What’s your alternative proposal for funding adaptation in the developing world, Roger – shall we simply throw money at them without any effort to ensure effectiveness?

]]>