Motoharu YamazakiUNFCCC Secretariat
http://[email protected]
Joint Implementation- An overview and recent development -
Moscow Carbon Market Forum 2008Moscow, Russian Federation, 28-29 April 2008
Joint Implementation Basic principles
Market mechanism
Lowest marginal cost of abatement
Additionality to any emission reductions that would occur in the absence of the project
Bottom-up approach, re-use and broad application principles for standards
International supervisory and standard setting bodies
Two tracks: Track 1 & Track 2
Track 2 process overseen by the body known as the Joint Implementation Supervisory Committee (JISC)
Joint Implementation JI Track 1/Track 2 (1)
Participation requirements• Designated focal point• National guidelines and procedures
Elig
ibili
ty r
equ
irem
en
ts(E
RU
iss
uan
ce,
tran
sfer
an
d
acq
uis
itio
n)
• Party to the Kyoto Protocol
• Assigned amount calculated
• National registry in place for tracking assigned amount
• National system in place forestimating emissions/removals
• Submission of most recent required emissions inventory
• Accurate accounting of assigned amount and submission of information
Track 2 procedure
Verification procedure under JISC
Track 1 procedure
Verification procedure according to host Party rules
Joint Implementation JI Track 1/Track 2 (2)
Track 2Verification procedure under JISC
• Mandatory publication procedures regarding all project steps (JI information system)
• Full transparency
Track 1 Verification procedure according to host Party rules
“Bali decision”
Request to secretariat to develop Web-based interface to be used by DFPs of host Parties (having provided information on national guidelines/procedures) to:
• Provide transparent access to project information
• Provide information to the international transaction log (ITL) on Track 1 project establishment
• Receive unique project identifiers to be used with the ITL
Overview of all JI projects
Joint Implementation JI Supervisory Committee
Members/alternates:
Members Alternate members
Annex I (EIT)
Mr. Oleg Pluzhnikov Ms. Agnieszka Gałan
Ms. Daniela Stoycheva Mr. Georgiy Geletukha
Mr. Vlad Trusca Mr. Matej Gasperic
Annex I (Non-EIT)
Mr. Olle Björk Mr. Franzjosef Schafhausen
Mr. Maurits Blanson Henkemans Mr. Hiroki Kudo
Mr. Georg Børsting Mr. Benoît Leguet
Non-Annex I
Mr. Carlos Fuller Mr. Javier Andrés Hubenthal
Ms. Fatou Gaye Mr. Vincent Kasulu Seya Makonga
Mr. Muhammed Quamrul Chowdhury Mr. Maosheng Duan
Non-Annex I (AOSIS)
Mr. Derrick Oderson Ms. Ngedikes Olai Uludong-Polloi
Basic role: Operationalization and supervision of JI Track 2 procedure
Mandates: CDM experience
• Rules of procedure
• Accreditation of independent entities
• Criteria for baseline setting and monitoring
• Provisions for small-scale projects
• JI project design document (PDD) form(s)
• Reviews
• Provisions for fees
• Management plan
• Reporting to the CMP
Joint Implementation Mandates of the JISC
Similarities Differences
• No approval of methodologies
• No project registration
• No ERU issuance by the JISC
• No limitation of LULUCF projects to afforestation and reforestation
• No restriction on CPR regarding ERUs issued under JI Track 2
Legal basis: “Marrakesh Accords” (Decision 9/CMP.1 ) “Montreal decision” (Decision 10/CMP.1 ) “Nairobi decisions” (Decisions 2/CMP.2 & 3/CMP.2 ) “Bali decision” (Decision _/CMP.3)
Joint Implementation Status of work of the JISC
2006: operationalization of JI Track 2 procedure
Mandates Adoption/ agreement (revision) by J I SC
Adoption by CMP
Administrative issues • Rules of procedure • Management plan 2006-2007
J I SC 01
J I SC 04 (05)
CMP 2
- PDD forms • PDD form • Guidelines for users (PDD form) • LULUCF PDD form • Guidelines for users (LULUCF PDD form)
J I SC 03
J I SC 03 (06) J I SC 04
J I SC 04 (06)
CMP 2
- CMP 2
- Verification procedure • Procedures on public availability of documents • Procedures for appraisals of determinations • Procedures for reviews
J I SC 04 J I SC 04 J I SC 03
- - -
Accreditation • Standards/ procedures • Panel
J I SC 04 (06)
J I SC 03
- -
Baseline setting and monitoring • Guidance on criteria
J I SC 04
-
Small-scale projects • Provisions for SSC projects • SSC PDD form • Guidelines for users (SSC PDD form)
J I SC 04 (06) J I SC 04 (05) J I SC 05 (06)
-
CMP 2 -
Fees • Provisions
J I SC 04
CMP 2 (endorsement)
J I SC report to CMP 2 • Main report • Addendum
prior to J I SC 04
after J I SC 05
- -
Launch ofJI Track 2 procedure
on26 October 2006
Since 2007: operation/supervision of JI Track 2 procedure
Joint Implementation JI Track 2 project cycle
Preparation and publication ofDetermination by
AIE
Possiblereview by
JISC
Preparation and publication ofmonitoring report byproject participants/AIE
Preparation and publication ofVerification by
AIE
Possiblereview by
JISC
45 days:decision on review request by
Parties involved/individual JISC members,
supp. by 2 JISC members’/alternates’ appraisal (incl. expert inputs)
15 days:decision on review request by
Parties involved/individual JISC members,
supp. by 2 JISC members’/alternates’ appraisal
Project development Project implementation
Issuance of ERUs
by host Party (conversion of AAUs/RMUs)
Transfer of ERUs by host Party and
acquisition of ERUs
Carbon Market
Preparation and publication ofPDD by
project participants/AIE
30 days:stakeholders’ comments
Fees (advance payment)Project approval by host Party
Participation requirements
Fees Project approval by non-host Party
(at the latest)
Eligibility requirements
Joint Implementation Baseline setting / monitoring
Appendix B to JI guidelines (adopted by CMP)
Guidance on baseline setting and monitoring (adopted by JISC)
Baseline: on project-specific basis and/or using multi-project emission factor
Project participants allowed, but not obliged, to use approved CDM baseline and monitoring methodologies
Additionality: various approaches possible
Provisions for small-scale projects (adopted by JISC)
JI SSC definitions: like for CDM SSC project activities (non-A/R) – revised by CMP 2
Main difference to CDM approach: No limits on bundling
Joint Implementation Stakeholders’ comments (status)
133 PDDs published for stakeholders’ comments(4 open for comments)
Host Parties:• Bulgaria (10 PDDs)• Estonia (4)• Germany (2)• Hungary (2)• Latvia (1) • Lithuania (7)
Technologies:• Renewable energy (biomass, wind, hydro)• Methane avoidance (gas distribution, landfills, coal mine)• Destruction of nitrous oxide from chemical processes (nitric acid production)• Energy efficiency (manufacturing industries, district heating)• Fuel switch (manufacturing industries, transportation, power generation)• Reduction of HFC, PFC and SF6 emissions (chemical and metal industries)
Emission reductions 2008-2012: ~ 251,000,000 t CO2equ
• Poland (7)• Romania (2)• Russian Federation (75)• Slovakia (1)• Ukraine (21)• Czech Rep. (1)
Joint Implementation Participation requirements (status)
Designated Focal Point
National guidelines
and procedures
Austria
Belarus*
Belgium
Bulgaria
Canada
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
European Community
Finland
France
Germany
Hungary
Ireland
Italy
Designated Focal Point
National guidelines
and procedures
Japan
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Netherlands
New Zealand
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russian Federation
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
Ukraine
UK
* The CMP, by its decision 10/CMP.2, adopted an amendment to Annex B to the Kyoto Protocol, adding Belarus to it.
Joint Implementation Accredited independent entities (1)
“Montreal decision” Designated operational entities (DOEs) under the CDM may act
provisionally as accredited independent entities (AIEs) under JI Determinations/actions valid only after accreditation
Accreditation status 15 applications (13 DOEs) to date, of which:
• 14 desk reviews conducted
• 13 on-site assessments conducted
• 3 indicative letters issued
• No witnessing assessment started yet
Joint Implementation Accredited independent entities (2)
• Application as of 28 April 2008
Ref No.
Entity name Sectoral scopes applied
0001 Det Norske Veritas Certification AS (DNV) 1-15 (all scopes)
0002 Japan Quality Assurance Organization (JQA) 1-15 (all scopes)
0003 Deloitte Tohmatsu Evaluation and Certification Organization Co., Ltd (TECO) 1-10, 12-13, 15
0004 Lloyd’s Register Quality Assurance Ltd. (LRQA) 1-13
0005 JACO CDM., Ltd. 1-15 (all scopes)
0006 Japan Consulting Institute (JCI) 1-5, 8-11, 13
0007 Bureau Veritas Certification Holding SAS 1-15 (all scopes)
0008 TÜV SÜD Industrie Service GmbH 1-15 (all scopes)
0009 Spanish Association for Standardisation and Certification (AENOR) 1-15 (all scopes)
0010 SGS United Kingdom Limited 1-15 (all scopes)
0011 TÜV NORD CERT GmbH 1-15 (all scopes)
0012 TÜV Rheinland Japan Ltd. 1-15 (all scopes)
0013 SQS, Swiss Association for Quality and Management Systems 1-15 (all scopes)
0014 KPMG Sustainability B.V. (KPMG) 1-4, 13
0015 Germanischer Lloyd Certification GmbH 1-3, 7, 10, 13
Joint Implementation Determinations (status)
Determinations regarding PDDs
First determination deemed final on 26 March 2007(“Switch from wet-to-dry process at Podilsky Cement”):
Host Party: Ukraine
Emission reductions 2008-2012: ~ 3,000,000 t CO2 equ
Joint Implementation UNFCCC JI website
http://ji.unfccc.int/
Reporting and review Overview 2006-2008
Reporting
(by Parties)
Review + Reports
(by ERTs)
• Initial report: deadline 1 Jan 07– 37 reports received by 1 Mar 08 – Most of them received in Dec 06 – Late submissions:
Iceland (11 Jan 07), the Russian Federation (20 Feb 07), Canada (15 Mar 07), Romania (18 May 07), Bulgaria (25 Jul 07)
– Monaco 7 May 07 (ratification 27 Feb 06, entry into force 28 May 06)
– New KP Parties:Croatia (rat. 30 May 07, e.i.f. 28 Aug 07), Australia (rat. 3 Dec 07, e.i.f. 2 Mar 08)
• Annual report: deadline 15 Apr 08
• Periodic reporting (NC4): deadline 1 Jan 06– Pending submissions by Luxemburg
• Initial review:– 37 review reports in 2007-2008
(decision 26/CMP.1 and 22/CMP.1)– 32 reports published, 4 under
preparation, 1 review pending Belarus– 2 new initial reviews: Australia, Croatia– 37 + 4 Review Reports of the 2006
Inventory submission under the Convention (decisions 7/CP.11)
• 38 Annual Review Reports to be prepared by 15 Apr 08 (Croatia not included)
• Periodic review (NC4) and RDP review:– 37 In-depth Review Reports in 2007–
2009– 16 IDRs published, 10 reviews planned
for May 2008
Reporting and review Establishing eligibility
Eligibility to be established (decision 11/CMP.1)
No later than 16 months have elapsed since the submission of the initial report unless the Enforcement Branch of the Compliance Committee finds that the Party does not meet eligibility requirements
Early eligibility: not applied
Status: 25 Parties are eligible as of 28 April 2008, another 4 parties will become eligible as of 29 April 2008:
– Ukraine: 29 April 2008 (expected) – Russian Federation: 20 June 2008 (expected)
Eligibility status released from the CAD to the ITL and eligible Parties could perform transactions, e.g. on emission trading
Reporting and review Maintaining eligibility
Decisions 11/CMP.1 and 15/CMP.1
Party continues to meet the eligibility requirements unless the Enforcement Branch of the Compliance Committee decides that the Party does not meet eligibility requirements
Party may start annual reporting from the year following the submission of the initial report, on a voluntary basis
2008 inventory submission for Kyoto Parties is already the KP annual submission for Parties to maintain eligibility
COP13/CMP3 Bali Roadmap
A two year negotiating process for a broad and robust response to climate change (deadline 2009).
Components:
• A new negotiation process under Convention
• Reducing emissions from deforestation
• Technology transfer
• Kyoto track: time table for the AWG, adaptation fund and the review of the Protocol
COP13/CMP3 Bali Action Plan
Enhance the implementation of the Convention (along with Kyoto negotiations)
An Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-Term Cooperative Action (AWG-LCA) to address:
• Nationally appropriate mitigation commitments or actions by developed countries and mitigation actions by developing countries;
• Actions to adapt to climate change and promote climate-resilient development;
• Finance and technology cooperation to support action.
Bangkok Climate Change Talks AWG-LCA 1
Agreed on work programme 2008
Organization of workshops to deepen understanding and clarify elements in Bali Action Plan
• Adaptation;
• Financial flow;
• Technology transfer;
• Deforestation / forest degradation;
• Sectoral approaches, sector specific actions;
• Risk management and risk reduction strategies
• R&D of innovative technology
• Shared vision of long-term cooperative action
Bangkok Climate Change Talks AWG 5
Emission trading, project-based mechanisms and LULUCF should continue to be available after 2012
Consider:
• Improvements to emission trading and project-based mechanisms;
• Treatment of LULUCF in 2nd commitment period;
• Approaches targeting sectoral emissions;
• Broadening of coverage of GHGs, sectors and source category;
• Approaches on emissions from aviation and marine bunker fuels;
• Implications for carbon market
Top Related