CDM Qtr Update

EU demonstration (knowledge.allianz.com)

Durban is over, the delegates have all either gone home or are enjoying the sunny South African weather, and serious actions to curb rising emissions have again been shunted down the road. (You can read more about the results at Durban on our colleague Payal Parekh's blog.) However, progress is being made on the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) – albeit slowly – to address some of its most serious flaws, including how to deal with non-additional, "hot air" projects in the world's largest emissions trading scheme, the European Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS).

Status of projects for which International Rivers and partners have submitted Comments (as of July 1, 2011)

For many years, International Rivers and our partners have been submitting comments on the worst hydropower projects in the CDM pipeline, raising issues ranging from environmental problems to human rights abuses to additionality. Our general experience has usually been that rather than seriously assessing public comments, the validators, also known as DOEs, ignore any criticism of the project developers' claims. Recently, however, a number of these projects, for which we had raised serious concerns, have had their validation terminated by their DOEs. Could these DOEs finally be hearing what we've been saying for years? 

Due to the exuberant craziness that was Rivers for Life 3 , we skipped the Third Quarter CDM update and went straight to the Fourth Quarter. To read about which projects have been "naughty or nice" (well, mostly naughty and all worthy of a large lump of coal this holiday season), see our CDM Comments page.

Update:

• The number of projects that entered the CDM pipeline increased in the first two quarters of 2010 (See Fig. 1).
• The percent of registered projects that were involved in the review process (which includes projects that require corrections) has been growing over the years (see Fig. 4): 9.5% in 2005, 9.1% in 2006, 19.3% in 2007, 56.9% in 2008, 70.4% in 2009, 53.7% in 2010 (as of July 1, 2010).
  
• 50% of all hydro projects in the CDM pipeline have requested registration since 2004, while 44% of all hydro projects have actually been registered. Figs. 3 and 4 show the fate of projects requesting registration and being registered by year.
• Hydro projects continue to be the most prevalent type of project in the CDM pipeline (28% of all projects). 63% of credits expected from hydro projects come from China

Update:

• The number of projects that entered the CDM pipeline stayed the same between the fourth quarter of 2009 and the first quarter or 2010 (See Fig. 1).
• The percent of hydropower projects entering the CDM pipeline relative to all CDM projects continues to be on a downward trend since 2007 (see Fig. 2).
• The percent of projects rejected out of the total number of projects requesting registration was 7.4% in 2007, 3.8% in 2008, and 2.0% in 2009 (this does not include withdrawn projects). 2009 saw an increase in rejections due to heightened scrutiny by the CDM Executive Board.
• The percent of registered projects that were involved in the review process (which includes projects that require corrections) has been growing over the years (see Fig. 4): 9.5% in 2005, 9.1% in 2006, 19.3% in 2007, 56.9% in 2008, 70.4% in 2009, 56.3% in 2010 (as of April). This is also likely the result of pressure by stakeholders for the CDM to review projects with questionable additionality and sustainability claims, and the CDM Executive Board's response.
• 46.6% of all hydro projects in the CDM pipeline have requested registration since 2004, while 41.5% of all hydro projects have actually been registered. Figs. 3 and 4 show the fate of projects requesting registration and being registered by year.
• Hydro projects continue to be the most prevalent type of project in the CDM pipeline (28% of all projects). 71% of hydro projects are located in China (the distribution among regions has been largely unchanged). 66% of all CERs issued come from China as well. Figs. 5 and 6 are based on the UNFCCC CDM pipeline database, last updated on March 1, 2010.

Update:

• The number of projects that entered the CDM pipeline fell 42% from the third quarter (See Fig. 1).
• The percent of hydropower projects entering the CDM pipeline relative to all CDM projects continues to be on a downward trend since 2007 (see Fig. 2).
• According to a new Point Carbon survey (sub req'd), one third of registered CDM projects never go on to receive CERs, or certified emissions reductions credits. Most notable are landfill gas and other waste projects. Arne Eik, analyst at Point Carbon, attribute the lack of issuance to: "problems with project finance prompted by the economic downturn, uncertainty about post-2012, and the difficulties some projects had in demonstrating they can cut emissions." 
• The percent of projects rejected out of the total number of projects requesting registration was 7.4% in 2007, 3.8% in 2008, and 1.4% in 2009 (this does not include withdrawn projects).
• 48% of all hydro projects in the CDM pipeline have requested registration since 2004, while 40% of all hydro projects have actually been registered. Figs. 3 and 4 show the fate of projects requesting registration and being registered by year. This graph shows the dramatic increase over the last year of projects that the Executive Board has requested be reviewed.
• Hydro projects continue to be the most prevalent type of project in the CDM pipeline (27% fo all projects). 70% of hydro projects are located in China. Figs. 5 and 6 are based on the UNFCCC CDM pipeline database, last updated on December 20, 2009.

Updates:

• The number of projects that entered the CDM pipeline increased slightly from the second quarter, although it dropped 14% from the third quarter in 2008 (See Fig. 1).
  
• The percent of hydropower projects entering the CDM pipeline relative to all CDM projects has been on a downward trend since 2007 (see Fig. 2).

Fig. 1: Projects entering the CDM pipeline.

For this second quarter update, I've introduced some new analyses (see below), along with those similar to the first quarter blog update. You can also get weekly email updates of CDM hydro projects and see our monthly spreadsheet, always available for your research and gleaning pleasure. Data based on the UNEP Risoe spreadsheet (June 1, 2009). Feel free to contact me about my calculations.

 

The world through the eyes of the CDM nerd.

Dovetailing my last blog on the decline of the CDM, I'm introducing a quarterly hydro CDM blog, which updates any CDM-nerds out there interested in the status of hydropower projects in the CDM. I also send out weekly email updates of CDM hydro projects and produce a monthly spreadsheet for your research and gleaning pleasure.