Workshop on Mitigation Accounting Quantifying GHG effects of...
Transcript of Workshop on Mitigation Accounting Quantifying GHG effects of...
David Rich
World Resources Institute
2 December 2012
Workshop on Mitigation Accounting Quantifying GHG effects of policies and actions and tracking progress toward GHG mitigation goals
• 1:00 – 1:45: Presentation on Greenhouse Gas Protocol Policies and Actions Standard and Mitigation Goals Standard
• 1:45 – 2:45: Panel with experts sharing international experience on measuring GHG reductions from mitigation actions, policies, and goals
• 2:45 – 3:30: Breakout groups to provide feedback on key questions in draft standards
Workshop agenda
GHG Protocol Mitigation Accounting Initiative
• The GHG Protocol was launched in 1998 by
• Multi-stakeholder partnership of businesses, NGOs, governments and others
• Enable corporate and government measurement and management practices that lead to a low carbon economy
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol
Corporate Standard
Corporate Value Chain
(Scope 3) Standard Project Protocol
Product Standard
GHG Protocol standards to date
• A WRI initiative focusing on enhancing capacity to measure emissions/emissions reductions and track performance towards meeting climate and energy goals in developing countries
• Supported by the German Federal Ministry of the Environment
Measurement and Performance Tracking (MAPT) Project
AREAS of WORK
National inventories
Institutions
Mitigation accounting
Forestry
Industry
Civil society policy implementation
International
COUNTRIES
Brazil
Colombia
Ethiopia
India
South Africa
Thailand
Two GHG Protocol standards under development
Policies and Actions Standard
• How to quantify GHG effects from specific policies and actions
• Examples: increased energy efficiency, increased renewable energy, efficiency standards, trading programs, deployment of new product lines and technologies
Mitigation Goals Standard
• How to track and report progress toward national or sub-national GHG reduction goals
• Examples: intensity-based goals, deviations from BAU scenarios, carbon neutrality, etc.
Standard development process
Secretariat (WRI)
Advisory Committee
Technical Working Groups
Review Group
Pilot Testers
• Asian Development Bank • Australia, Department of Climate
Change and Energy Efficiency • Brazil, Ministry of Environment • California Air Resources Board • CCAP • Chile, Ministry of Environment • China, NDRC • Colombia, Ministry of Environment and
Sustainable Development • Costa Rican Institute of Electricity • Ecofys • Ethiopia, EPA • European Commission • Godrej & Boyce Mfg Co. Ltd., India • India, BEE (TBC) • Japan, Ministry of Environment • Johnson Controls
Advisory Committee members
• Maersk Group • New York City, Mayor's Office • OECD • Siemens • South Africa, Department of
Environmental Affairs • State of Rio de Janeiro • Stockholm Environment Institute – US • Thailand Greenhouse Gas Management
Organization • Tsinghua University • UK DECC • United Nations Climate Change
Secretariat • UNDP • US EPA • WBCSD • World Bank
Timeline
Activities 2012 2013 2014
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
Convene stakeholder groups
Develop draft standards
First drafts released (November 21)
Workshops (Doha, DC, Beijing) and
review period (through January 11)
Revise draft standards
Pilot test standards
Public comment period
Publish final standards
• The draft standards are available at:
www.ghgprotocol.org/mitigation-accounting
• First drafts are available for public comment from November 21 – January 11
• Participate in pilot testing in 2013
How to participate in the standard development process
GHG Protocol Policies and Actions Standard
• Increasing need to quantify GHG effects of policies and actions
• Where policy effects have been quantified, often lack of consistency and transparency
• Where they have not been quantified, often lack of capacity
• No international, cross-sector guidelines exist for how to quantify GHG effects of policies and actions larger than projects
Context
Estimated GHG reductions from proposed NAMAs
Country and
Sector
Examples of data to be monitored Estimated mitigation
potential
Jordan
(Waste) Not specified Not specified
Mexico
(Buildings)
Electricity use (annual, direct metering)
Emission factor from grid electricity
Gross floor area of building units
Cumulative 84-140
MtCO2 by 2020
South Africa
(Energy supply)
Capacity of CSP installed through program
Electricity produced from funded CSP installations
Capacity of wind power installed through program
60 MtCO2 per year
Chile (Transport)
Number of electric vehicles (quarterly)
Passenger figures (monthly)
Km traveled (monthly)
Cumulative 2.8 MtCO2
by 2035
Colombia
(Transport) Not specified Not specified
Mexico
(Transport) Not specified
Cumulative 6.4 MtCO2e
by 2030
Tunisia
(Energy supply)
Power installed (MW)
Solar panels produced each year
Amount of exchanged refrigerators
1.5 MtCO2e per year
• Provide standardized approaches and guidance on how to quantify GHG effects of policies and actions
• Guide users in answering the following questions:
– Before implementation: What effect is a given policy or action likely to have on GHG emissions?
– During implementation: How to track progress of a policy or action?
– After implementation: What effect has a given policy or action had on GHG emissions?
• Focus is on attributing changes in GHG emissions to specific policies and actions, not only tracking indicators
Purpose of Policies and Actions Standard
• Inform mitigation strategies based on expected GHG effects of policies/actions
• Track effectiveness and performance of policies/actions and progress toward GHG reduction goals
• Report on GHG effects of policies/actions
• Facilitate financial support for mitigation actions (e.g., NAMAs) based on quantification of GHG reductions, including market mechanisms
Objectives of quantifying GHG effects of policies/actions
GHG inventory
and projections
Set GHG goal
Assess and select GHG mitigation
actions
Implement actions
and monitor progress
Evaluate and report
on achieved
reductions
Goal setting and policy cycle
Source: City of New York, 2010
. . .
Example: New York City
Intended users
• Governments (city, sub-national, national)
• Donor agencies and financial institutions
• Businesses
• NGOs/research institutions
• Voluntary
• Policy-neutral
• Internationally applicable
• General guidance applicable to all sectors and types of policies/actions (overarching principles, concepts, and procedures)
• Will include sector-specific and policy-specific examples and guidance (e.g., energy supply, buildings, transportation, AFOLU, waste, industry, cross-sector policy instruments)
Scope
• Regulations and standards
• Taxes and charges
• Tradable permits
• Voluntary agreements
• Subsides and incentives
• Information instruments
• R&D policies
• Public procurement policies
• Infrastructure programs
• Deployment of new products or technologies
• Financing and investment
Types of policies and actions
Table of contents and sequence of steps
1. Introduction
2. Objectives
3. Key concepts, overview of steps, and summary of requirements
4. Accounting and reporting principles
5. Defining the policy or action
6. Mapping the causal chain
7. Defining the GHG assessment boundary
8. Determining baseline emissions
9. Quantifying GHG effects ex-ante
10. Monitoring performance over time
11. Quantifying GHG effects ex-post
12. Assessing uncertainty
13. Verification
14. Reporting
Chapter 5: Define the policy or action
• Clearly define the specific interventions involved
• Decide whether to analyze:
– An individual policy or action
– A package of similar policies or actions
Chapter 6: Mapping the causal chain
• Key step: identifying potential effects of the policy or action
• Types of effects
– Intended effects
– Unintended effects (e.g., rebound effects)
– In-boundary effects
– Out-of-boundary effects (e.g., leakage and spillover effects)
– Short-term effects
– Long-term effects
Chapter 6: Mapping the causal chain
• Example: U.S. vehicle fuel efficiency standards
• Intended effects
– CO2/km so emissions
• Unintended effects (e.g., rebound effects)
– $/km driven so km driven so emissions
• In-boundary effects
– Emissions in the U.S.
• Out-of-boundary effects (e.g., leakage and spillover effects)
– Emissions in Canada
• Short-term effects
– Cars more efficient, but using same technology
• Long-term effects
– New vehicle technologies developed
• Greenhouse gases covered
– CO2, CH4, N2O, SF6, PFCs, HFCs, NF3
• Temporal boundary
– Policy implementation period
– Policy monitoring period
– GHG assessment period
Chapter 7: Define the GHG assessment boundary
Example
Years
2005 –
2009
2010 -
2014
2015 -
2019
2020 -
2024
2025 -
2029
2030 -
2034
2035 -
2039
2040 -
2045
Policy implementation
period
Policy monitoring
period
GHG assessment
period
• Which GHG effects to include in the boundary?
• Current draft: Users shall include all significant effects in the boundary, consistent with the chosen tier
Chapter 7: Define the GHG assessment boundary
Tier
Approach for determining
significance of GHG
effects
Level of completeness
Tier 1 Qualitative, user-defined
assessment of significance User-defined
Tier 2 Quantitative assessment of
significance: based on 1)
likelihood of the effect
occurring, and 2) estimated
magnitude of expected GHG
impact
Significant effects included
Tier 3 Insignificant effects estimated
rather than excluded
Chapter 7: Defining the GHG assessment boundary
• Example: U.S. vehicle fuel efficiency standards
• Intended effects
– CO2/km so emissions
• Unintended effects (e.g., rebound effects)
– $/km driven so km driven so emissions
• In-boundary effects
– Emissions in the U.S.
• Out-of-boundary effects (e.g., leakage and spillover effects)
– Emissions in Canada
• Short-term effects
– Cars more efficient, but using same technology
• Long-term effects
– New vehicle technologies developed
• Define the baseline scenario
– For each effect, define baseline emissions based on underlying drivers
• policy drivers
• non-policy drivers
• Define the policy scenario (ex-ante or ex-post)
– Define emissions in the policy scenario based on what is expected to change as a result of the policy
Quantify GHG effects of the policy or action
Ex-ante and ex-post assessment G
HG
em
issio
ns (
metr
ic t
on
s C
O2e)
Quantified
GHG effect of
policy/action
(ex-ante) Historical
GHG
emissions
2010 2015 2020
Quantified
GHG effect of
policy/action
(ex-post)
Types of interactions
• Neutral
• Counteracting
• Reinforcing
Addressing policy interactions and overlaps
5
10
15 12
20
0
5
10
15
20
25
Em
issio
ns r
ed
ucti
on
(tC
O2e)
Monitoring indicators during implementation
Indicator type Ex: Subsidy for
insulation in houses
Ex: Grants for renewable
lamps replacing kerosene
lamps
Input Money, skills, awareness
raising Money, skills, technology
Activity
Number of energy
surveys carried out to
test eligibility for
insulation
Number of renewable lamps
sold
Output/Effect Number of households
insulated
Market share of renewable
lamps in 2015, 2020, and
2025
Outcome/GHG
effect GHG emissions reduced GHG emissions reduced
GHG Protocol Mitigation Goals Standard
• Provide standardized approaches and guidance on how to track progress toward GHG mitigation goals
• Guide users in answering the following questions:
– For jurisdictions that do not have a mitigation goal: Which factors to consider when developing a mitigation goal
– Before the goal period: How to estimate future GHG reductions associated with meeting the goal
– During the goal period: How to track and report progress toward meeting the goal
– After the goal period: How to evaluate and report whether the goal has been achieved
Purpose of Mitigation Goals Standard
• Australia: 80% reduction below 2000 levels by 2050
• Brazil: Between 36.1% and 38.9% below projected emissions in 2020
• California: reduce to 1990 levels by 2020
• Chile: 20% reduction below the BAU in 2020, as projected from 2007
• China: 40-45% reduction in CO2 emissions per unit of GDP by 2020 compared with the 2005 level
• Costa Rica: Will implement a ‘long-term economy-wide transformational effort to enable carbon-neutrality’
• European Union: 20-30% below 1990 levels by 2020
• New York City: 30% below 2005 levels by 2030
• South Africa: 34% deviation below BAU by 2020
• United States: In the range of 17% below 2005 levels by 2020
Examples of mitigation goals
• Internationally applicable
• Applicable to all levels of government (municipal, subnational, national)
• All types of mitigation goals
– Absolute reductions from a base year
– Reductions from a baseline
– Reductions in emissions intensity
– Reductions to an absolute level
– Sectoral goals
Scope
• Both can be applied independently or together
• Example:
– Use the Mitigation Goals Standard to understand the level of GHG reductions needed to meet a given GHG mitigation goal
– Use the Policies and Actions Standard to quantify the GHG effects of selected policies and actions to determine if they are collectively sufficient to meet the goal
Relationship to Policies and Actions Standard
Table of contents and sequence of steps
1. Introduction
2. Objectives
3. Key concepts, overview of steps, and summary of requirements
4. Accounting and reporting principles
5. Determining the mitigation goal type, goal level, and goal length
6. Defining the goal boundary
7. Determining base year and baseline scenario emissions
8. Accounting for emissions reductions generated outside of the goal boundary
9. Accounting for the land-use sector
10. Estimating future emissions and reductions associated with the goal
11. Tracking progress during the goal period and evaluating achievement at the end of the goal period
12. Reporting
• Scope – Which gases and sectors are included? • Historical reference period and timeframe – Which year(s) of
GHG inventory are the historical reference for the baseline scenario?
• Modelling framework – Which model will be used to project emissions?
• Key emissions drivers and underlying assumptions – Which key emissions drivers and underlying assumption will be used?
• Baseline recalculation – Under what conditions should the baseline scenario be recalculated?
• Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis – How will uncertainty and sensitivity analysis be addressed?
• Policies and measures – How will policies and measures be included in the baseline scenario?
Determining baseline scenario emissions
Draft standard:
• Jurisdictions should use the ‘with measures’ approach and report the cut-off year after which no new policies are assumed to be implemented
• Jurisdictions shall disclose and justify how policies and measures are included in the baseline scenario
Inclusion of policies and measures in the baseline scenario
Type of baseline Description
Without
measures
Does not include impacts of mitigation policies and
measures, including existing policies and measures
With measures Includes mitigation policies and measures that are
currently implemented (in the year baseline is created)
With additional
measures
Includes all mitigation policies and measures that are
currently implemented, in the legislative process, or
planned (in the year the baseline is created)
Source: UNFCCC Guidelines for National Communications, FCCC/CP/1999/7, Page 89
• Emissions reductions outside of the goal boundary may be used towards meeting a jurisdiction’s goal
• Jurisdictions shall not double count or double claim GHG reductions
• Mechanisms to avoid double counting include:
– Legal mandates that disallow double counting
– Registries
– Transaction logs
– Agreements between buyers and sellers that specify who claims emissions reductions associated with offsets and specifies what percentage, if any, are shared
Use of emission reductions outside the goal boundary
• The draft standards are available at:
www.ghgprotocol.org/mitigation-accounting
• Review period from November 21 – January 11
• Participate in pilot testing in 2013
How to participate in the standard development process
Thank you David Rich 1-202-729-7744 [email protected]