Evaluating Carbon Offsets from Forestry and Energy Projects : How Do They Compare?

Under the Kyoto Protocol, industrial countries accept caps on their emissions of greenhouse gases. They are permitted to acquire offsetting emissions reductions from developing countries - which do not have emissions limitations - to assist in comp...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Chomitz, Kenneth M.
Format: Policy Research Working Paper
Language:English
en_US
Published: World Bank, Washington, DC 2014
Subjects:
AIR
GAS
OIL
Online Access:http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2000/06/437511/evaluating-carbon-offsets-forestry-energy-projects
http://hdl.handle.net/10986/19838
id okr-10986-19838
recordtype oai_dc
repository_type Digital Repository
institution_category Foreign Institution
institution Digital Repositories
building World Bank Open Knowledge Repository
collection World Bank
language English
en_US
topic ABATEMENT
AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES
AGRICULTURAL INTENSIFICATION
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION
AIR
AIR POLLUTION
ATMOSPHERE
BARRIERS TO ADOPTION
BASELINE DETERMINATION
BASELINE EMISSIONS
BASELINE LEVELS
BASELINE METHODOLOGIES
BASIC METALS
BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
BIOMASS
BOILERS
CALCULATION
CARBON
CARBON EMISSIONS
CARBON EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS
CARBON OFFSETS
CARBON PLANTATIONS
CARBON POOLS
CARBON PROJECT
CARBON PROJECTS
CARBON RELEASE
CARBON SEQUESTRATION
CARBON STORAGE
CATTLE RAISING
CELLULOSE
CERTIFICATION APPROACH
CERTIFIED EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS
CLEAN DEVELOPMENT
CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM
CLIMATE
CLIMATE ACTION
CLIMATE CHANGE
COAL
COAL CONSUMPTION
COAL PLANT
COGENERATION
CONSERVATION
CONSERVATION PROJECTS
CONSUMPTION OF FOSSIL
COST SAVINGS
DECISION MAKING
DEFORESTATION
DEMAND FOR ENERGY
DEVELOPED COUNTRIES
DIESEL
DIESEL FUEL
DIFFUSION
ECONOMIES OF SCALE
ECOSYSTEM
ELASTICITIES
ELASTICITY OF DEMAND
ELECTRIC MOTORS
ELECTRIC POWER
ELECTRICITY
EMISSIONS
EMISSIONS LEVELS
EMISSIONS REDUCTION
EMISSIONS SCENARIOS
EMPLOYMENT
ENERGY CONSUMERS
ENERGY CONSUMPTION
ENERGY EFFICIENCY
ENERGY SAVINGS
ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS
EXPLOITATION
FARMS
FOREST COVER
FORESTRY
FORESTS
FOSSIL FUEL
FOSSIL FUELS
FUEL
FUEL CONSUMPTION
FUEL OIL
FUEL PRICE
FUEL- SWITCHING PROJECTS
FUEL-SWITCHING PROJECTS
FUELS
GAS
GAS COMBUSTION
GLOBAL WARMING
GREENHOUSE
GREENHOUSE GAS
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
GREENHOUSE GASES
GRID POWER
HEATING PLANTS
HOUSEHOLD ENERGY
HYPOTHETICAL BASELINE
INELASTIC DEMAND
INSURANCE
INVENTORIES
JOINT IMPLEMENTATION
KYOTO PROTOCOL
LAND USE
LAND USE CHANGE
MARKET PRICES
METHANE
METHANE RECOVERY
MITIGATING CLIMATE CHANGE
NATURAL GAS
NEGATIVE LEAKAGE
NET EMISSIONS
NET EMISSIONS REDUCTION
OIL
OPPORTUNITY COSTS
POLLUTION CONTROL
POWER GENERATION
POWER PLANTS
PRESENT VALUE
PRICE ELASTICITY
PRICE ELASTICITY OF DEMAND
PROGRAMS
REDUCING CARBON EMISSIONS
REDUCTION IN CARBON
RENEWABLE ENERGY
RESERVOIRS
SAVINGS
SOIL
SOILS
SOLAR POWER
SPATIAL PATTERNS
STREAMS
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
TIMBER
TROPICAL DEFORESTATION
VEGETATION
WAGES
WATER QUALITY
WIND
spellingShingle ABATEMENT
AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES
AGRICULTURAL INTENSIFICATION
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION
AIR
AIR POLLUTION
ATMOSPHERE
BARRIERS TO ADOPTION
BASELINE DETERMINATION
BASELINE EMISSIONS
BASELINE LEVELS
BASELINE METHODOLOGIES
BASIC METALS
BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
BIOMASS
BOILERS
CALCULATION
CARBON
CARBON EMISSIONS
CARBON EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS
CARBON OFFSETS
CARBON PLANTATIONS
CARBON POOLS
CARBON PROJECT
CARBON PROJECTS
CARBON RELEASE
CARBON SEQUESTRATION
CARBON STORAGE
CATTLE RAISING
CELLULOSE
CERTIFICATION APPROACH
CERTIFIED EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS
CLEAN DEVELOPMENT
CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM
CLIMATE
CLIMATE ACTION
CLIMATE CHANGE
COAL
COAL CONSUMPTION
COAL PLANT
COGENERATION
CONSERVATION
CONSERVATION PROJECTS
CONSUMPTION OF FOSSIL
COST SAVINGS
DECISION MAKING
DEFORESTATION
DEMAND FOR ENERGY
DEVELOPED COUNTRIES
DIESEL
DIESEL FUEL
DIFFUSION
ECONOMIES OF SCALE
ECOSYSTEM
ELASTICITIES
ELASTICITY OF DEMAND
ELECTRIC MOTORS
ELECTRIC POWER
ELECTRICITY
EMISSIONS
EMISSIONS LEVELS
EMISSIONS REDUCTION
EMISSIONS SCENARIOS
EMPLOYMENT
ENERGY CONSUMERS
ENERGY CONSUMPTION
ENERGY EFFICIENCY
ENERGY SAVINGS
ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS
EXPLOITATION
FARMS
FOREST COVER
FORESTRY
FORESTS
FOSSIL FUEL
FOSSIL FUELS
FUEL
FUEL CONSUMPTION
FUEL OIL
FUEL PRICE
FUEL- SWITCHING PROJECTS
FUEL-SWITCHING PROJECTS
FUELS
GAS
GAS COMBUSTION
GLOBAL WARMING
GREENHOUSE
GREENHOUSE GAS
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
GREENHOUSE GASES
GRID POWER
HEATING PLANTS
HOUSEHOLD ENERGY
HYPOTHETICAL BASELINE
INELASTIC DEMAND
INSURANCE
INVENTORIES
JOINT IMPLEMENTATION
KYOTO PROTOCOL
LAND USE
LAND USE CHANGE
MARKET PRICES
METHANE
METHANE RECOVERY
MITIGATING CLIMATE CHANGE
NATURAL GAS
NEGATIVE LEAKAGE
NET EMISSIONS
NET EMISSIONS REDUCTION
OIL
OPPORTUNITY COSTS
POLLUTION CONTROL
POWER GENERATION
POWER PLANTS
PRESENT VALUE
PRICE ELASTICITY
PRICE ELASTICITY OF DEMAND
PROGRAMS
REDUCING CARBON EMISSIONS
REDUCTION IN CARBON
RENEWABLE ENERGY
RESERVOIRS
SAVINGS
SOIL
SOILS
SOLAR POWER
SPATIAL PATTERNS
STREAMS
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
TIMBER
TROPICAL DEFORESTATION
VEGETATION
WAGES
WATER QUALITY
WIND
Chomitz, Kenneth M.
Evaluating Carbon Offsets from Forestry and Energy Projects : How Do They Compare?
relation Policy Research Working Paper;No. 2357
description Under the Kyoto Protocol, industrial countries accept caps on their emissions of greenhouse gases. They are permitted to acquire offsetting emissions reductions from developing countries - which do not have emissions limitations - to assist in complying with these caps. Because these emissions reductions are defined against a hypothetical baseline, practical issues arise in ensuring that the reductions are genuine. Forestry-related emissions reduction projects are often thought to present greater difficulties in measurement and implementation, than energy-related emissions reduction projects. The author discusses how project characteristics affect the process for determining compliance with each of the criteria for qualifying. Those criteria are: 1) Additionality. Would these emissions reductions not have taken place without the project? 2) Baseline and systems boundaries (leakage). What would business-as-usual emissions have been without the project? And in this comparison, how broad should spatial, and temporal system boundaries be? 3) Measurement (or sequestration). How accurately can we measure actual with-project emissions levels? 4) Duration or permanence. Will the project have an enduring mitigating effect? 5) Local impact. Will the project benefit its neighbors? For all the criteria except permanence, it is difficult to find generic distinctions between land use change and forestry and energy projects, since both categories comprise diverse project types. The important distinctions among projects have to do with such things as: a) The level and distribution of the project's direct financial benefits. b) How much the project is integrated with the larger system. c) The project components' internal homogeneity and geographic dispersion. d) The local replicability of project technologies. Permanence is an issue specific to land use and forestry projects. The author describes various approaches to ensure permanence, or adjust credits for duration: the ton-year approach (focusing on the benefits from deferring climatic damage, and rewarding longer deferral); the combination approach (bundling current land use change and forestry emissions reductions with future reductions in the buyer's allowed amount); a technology-acceleration approach; and an insurance approach.
format Publications & Research :: Policy Research Working Paper
author Chomitz, Kenneth M.
author_facet Chomitz, Kenneth M.
author_sort Chomitz, Kenneth M.
title Evaluating Carbon Offsets from Forestry and Energy Projects : How Do They Compare?
title_short Evaluating Carbon Offsets from Forestry and Energy Projects : How Do They Compare?
title_full Evaluating Carbon Offsets from Forestry and Energy Projects : How Do They Compare?
title_fullStr Evaluating Carbon Offsets from Forestry and Energy Projects : How Do They Compare?
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating Carbon Offsets from Forestry and Energy Projects : How Do They Compare?
title_sort evaluating carbon offsets from forestry and energy projects : how do they compare?
publisher World Bank, Washington, DC
publishDate 2014
url http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2000/06/437511/evaluating-carbon-offsets-forestry-energy-projects
http://hdl.handle.net/10986/19838
_version_ 1764441646767800320
spelling okr-10986-198382021-04-23T14:03:46Z Evaluating Carbon Offsets from Forestry and Energy Projects : How Do They Compare? Chomitz, Kenneth M. ABATEMENT AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES AGRICULTURAL INTENSIFICATION AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION AIR AIR POLLUTION ATMOSPHERE BARRIERS TO ADOPTION BASELINE DETERMINATION BASELINE EMISSIONS BASELINE LEVELS BASELINE METHODOLOGIES BASIC METALS BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION BIOMASS BOILERS CALCULATION CARBON CARBON EMISSIONS CARBON EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS CARBON OFFSETS CARBON PLANTATIONS CARBON POOLS CARBON PROJECT CARBON PROJECTS CARBON RELEASE CARBON SEQUESTRATION CARBON STORAGE CATTLE RAISING CELLULOSE CERTIFICATION APPROACH CERTIFIED EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS CLEAN DEVELOPMENT CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM CLIMATE CLIMATE ACTION CLIMATE CHANGE COAL COAL CONSUMPTION COAL PLANT COGENERATION CONSERVATION CONSERVATION PROJECTS CONSUMPTION OF FOSSIL COST SAVINGS DECISION MAKING DEFORESTATION DEMAND FOR ENERGY DEVELOPED COUNTRIES DIESEL DIESEL FUEL DIFFUSION ECONOMIES OF SCALE ECOSYSTEM ELASTICITIES ELASTICITY OF DEMAND ELECTRIC MOTORS ELECTRIC POWER ELECTRICITY EMISSIONS EMISSIONS LEVELS EMISSIONS REDUCTION EMISSIONS SCENARIOS EMPLOYMENT ENERGY CONSUMERS ENERGY CONSUMPTION ENERGY EFFICIENCY ENERGY SAVINGS ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS EXPLOITATION FARMS FOREST COVER FORESTRY FORESTS FOSSIL FUEL FOSSIL FUELS FUEL FUEL CONSUMPTION FUEL OIL FUEL PRICE FUEL- SWITCHING PROJECTS FUEL-SWITCHING PROJECTS FUELS GAS GAS COMBUSTION GLOBAL WARMING GREENHOUSE GREENHOUSE GAS GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS GREENHOUSE GASES GRID POWER HEATING PLANTS HOUSEHOLD ENERGY HYPOTHETICAL BASELINE INELASTIC DEMAND INSURANCE INVENTORIES JOINT IMPLEMENTATION KYOTO PROTOCOL LAND USE LAND USE CHANGE MARKET PRICES METHANE METHANE RECOVERY MITIGATING CLIMATE CHANGE NATURAL GAS NEGATIVE LEAKAGE NET EMISSIONS NET EMISSIONS REDUCTION OIL OPPORTUNITY COSTS POLLUTION CONTROL POWER GENERATION POWER PLANTS PRESENT VALUE PRICE ELASTICITY PRICE ELASTICITY OF DEMAND PROGRAMS REDUCING CARBON EMISSIONS REDUCTION IN CARBON RENEWABLE ENERGY RESERVOIRS SAVINGS SOIL SOILS SOLAR POWER SPATIAL PATTERNS STREAMS SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT TIMBER TROPICAL DEFORESTATION VEGETATION WAGES WATER QUALITY WIND Under the Kyoto Protocol, industrial countries accept caps on their emissions of greenhouse gases. They are permitted to acquire offsetting emissions reductions from developing countries - which do not have emissions limitations - to assist in complying with these caps. Because these emissions reductions are defined against a hypothetical baseline, practical issues arise in ensuring that the reductions are genuine. Forestry-related emissions reduction projects are often thought to present greater difficulties in measurement and implementation, than energy-related emissions reduction projects. The author discusses how project characteristics affect the process for determining compliance with each of the criteria for qualifying. Those criteria are: 1) Additionality. Would these emissions reductions not have taken place without the project? 2) Baseline and systems boundaries (leakage). What would business-as-usual emissions have been without the project? And in this comparison, how broad should spatial, and temporal system boundaries be? 3) Measurement (or sequestration). How accurately can we measure actual with-project emissions levels? 4) Duration or permanence. Will the project have an enduring mitigating effect? 5) Local impact. Will the project benefit its neighbors? For all the criteria except permanence, it is difficult to find generic distinctions between land use change and forestry and energy projects, since both categories comprise diverse project types. The important distinctions among projects have to do with such things as: a) The level and distribution of the project's direct financial benefits. b) How much the project is integrated with the larger system. c) The project components' internal homogeneity and geographic dispersion. d) The local replicability of project technologies. Permanence is an issue specific to land use and forestry projects. The author describes various approaches to ensure permanence, or adjust credits for duration: the ton-year approach (focusing on the benefits from deferring climatic damage, and rewarding longer deferral); the combination approach (bundling current land use change and forestry emissions reductions with future reductions in the buyer's allowed amount); a technology-acceleration approach; and an insurance approach. 2014-08-28T18:44:59Z 2014-08-28T18:44:59Z 2000-06 http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2000/06/437511/evaluating-carbon-offsets-forestry-energy-projects http://hdl.handle.net/10986/19838 English en_US Policy Research Working Paper;No. 2357 CC BY 3.0 IGO http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo/ World Bank, Washington, DC Publications & Research :: Policy Research Working Paper Publications & Research