Suchergebnisse

This report summarizes key lessons learned from the Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Joint Implementation (JI) for the new Article 6.4 mechanism of the Paris Agreement. The report first provides an overview of the issuance and use of carbon credits under these mechanisms. This is followed by an assessment of what elements of the existing mechanisms could be transferred to the Article 6.4 mechanism. Some provisions from the CDM can be transferred with only minor adjustments as they are the result of substantial refinement and overhaul. This includes the rules and regulations for the project cycle, accreditation of auditors, validation and verification, provisions to ensure transparency and the governance structure. However, in other areas, Article 6.4 rules should be strengthened compared to the CDM and JI, mainly with regard to demonstrating additionality, quantifying emission reductions, addressing non-permanence and social and environmental safeguards. Based on the experiences with CDM and JI, we recommend that mitigation activities under the Article 6.4 mechanism should be considered 'high-hanging fruits', enhance ambition, have a high likelihood of additionality, provide co-benefits for other sustainable development targets, and ensure that emission reductions can be reasonably attributable to the mitigation activity.

This study assesses whether existing international carbon market methodologies for determination of additionality and baselines and monitoring, particularly those from the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), can be adjusted to transition to the Article 6.4 mechanism. We highlight the necessity of drawing from the experiences of the Kyoto Protocol. CDM methodologies need to be modified to align with the more rigorous requirements of Article 6.4 of the Paris Agreement. Reaching consensus among Article 6.4 Supervisory Body (SB) members on developing a methodology guidance has been challenging and shows that there is a wide range of interpretation of the Article 6.4 methodology requirements. On this basis, we discuss different options to operationalise the Article 6.4 methodology requirements and focus on the option to develop overarching methodological tools that can be applied to make CDM methodologies "Article 6.4 proof". We illustrate this approach by applying it to two CDM methodologies, ACM0005 ("Increasing the blend in cement production") and ACM0006 ("Electricity and heat generation from biomass"). For these methodologies, we propose specific adjustments to ensure alignment with Article 6.4 requirements, particularly regarding additionality determination, avoidance of lock-in of emissions, quantification of emission reductions and monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV).

This report provides a comprehensive overview of climate cost modelling, from the perspective of damage costs and mitigation costs respectively. It also provides guidance for policymakers on which framework shall be used to derive climate costs for different policy objectives. For both frameworks, the study describes the landscape of available models and their methods. It analyses the role and impact of different influencing factors and separates them into categories, such as scenarios, normative choices or structural elements. The report identifies and discusses the main sources of uncertainties and the range of the literature's values. It discusses limitations of interpreting model results — making assumptions and approaches of different climate models transparent. Finally, there is a practical guidance in four steps on the process to derive a climate cost 'price tag' targeted to a specific policy question. The internalisation of external costs calls for applying a damage costs framework, while identifying the necessary effort for complying with an agreed temperature limit requires mitigation costs, for example.

Artikel 6 des Pariser Abkommens legt drei Ansätze fest, nach denen die Vertragsparteien bei der Erreichung ihrer national festgelegten Beiträge (NDCs) zusammenarbeiten. Einer dieser Ansätze ist ein neuer Mechanismus gemäß Artikel 6.4, der zur Minderung der Treibhausgasemissionen und zur Unterstützung einer nachhaltigen Entwicklung beitragen soll. Die detaillierten Regeln, Modalitäten und Verfahren zur Umsetzung des Mechanismus werden derzeit noch verhandelt. Ziel dieses Projekts war es, durch die Analyse einer Reihe von Ausgestaltungsfragen zur Entwicklung der Regelungen für den neuen Mechanismus beizutragen: Welche Optionen existieren, um eine allgemeine Minderung der globalen Emissionen zu erreichen, wie es in Art. 6.4(d) des Pariser Abkommens vorgeschriebenen ist? Inwieweit können Baselines auf der Grundlage von Werte für beste verfügbare Technologien (BVT) festgelegt werden? Wie kann der neue Mechanismus genutzt werden, um die Ambition der NDCs zu erhöhen, wie in Art. 6.1 des Pariser Abkommens gefordert wird? Welche Rolle kann der freiwillige Kohlenstoffmarkt bei der Erhöhung der Ambitionen spielen? Welche Anreize können für private Unternehmen geschaffen werden, sich an dem neuen Mechanismus zu beteiligen? Welche Rolle kann Artikel 6 auf dem Weg zu einer (netto) emissionsfreien Welt spielen? Im Verlauf des Projekts wurden diese Fragen und mögliche Lösungen in sechs Arbeitspapieren analysiert. Darüber hinaus wurden die wichtigsten Ergebnisse des Projekts in einem Workshop am 30. Oktober 2018 diskutiert. Der vorliegende Bericht fasst die Ergebnisse aus den Arbeitspapieren und dem Workshop zusammen und setzt sie in Beziehung zum Stand nach den Verhandlungen nach der Klimakonferenz in Madrid (CoP 25) im November 2019.