This article shows how sample offsets projects are treated in five programmes: the Clean Development Mechanism, Climate Action Reserve, Chicago Climate Exchange, Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, and the U.S. EPA’s former Climate Leaders programme.
The outcome of recent international climate negotiations suggests we are headed toward a more fragmented carbon market, with multiple emission trading and offset programs operating in parallel. To effectively harmonize and link across programs, it will be important to ensure that across offset programs and protocols that a “ton is a ton”.
The authors evaluate how sample offset projects in the U.S. carbon market are treated across protocols from five programmes. They find that differences among protocols for landfill methane, manure management, and afforestation/reforestation project types in accounting boundary definitions, baseline setting methods, measurement rules, emission factors, and discounts lead to differences in offsets credited that are often significant (e.g. greater than 50%).
The authors end by suggesting opportunities for modification and harmonization of protocols that can improve offset quality and credibility and enhance prospects for future linking of trading units and systems.
Read the article (external link to journal)
Note: An earlier version of this article was published as SEI-US Working Paper WP-US-1001.
Design and development by Soapbox.