Main knowledge bank page |
Recent additions |
Recent changes |
What links here |
Categories |
Search the forum
How-to guides |
Organisation profiles |
Project profiles
Can Carbon Finance Clean Cooking? by Dick Jones
This article discusses household energy from the perspective of a
carbon finance company.
As most readers of this article will already be aware, cooking is
the hidden development issue. Although the first Millennium
Development Goal (MDG) includes halving the proportion of the
world’s people who suffer from hunger, most efforts to meet the
MDGs ignore the fact that over 90% of staple food requires to be
cooked for long periods and that the majority of the poor cook
using unsustainable methods, often resulting in sickness or death
from indoor air pollution affecting the achievement of other
MDGs..
To date, most cookstove projects have been funded by development
agencies though there is a growing number of commercial projects.
However, for the poorest communities, despite the low cost of clean
cooking, the initial cost is a major barrier. Carbon finance is
potentially a way of overcoming such a barrier. With a typical
saving of one tonne per year of CO2 equivalent (TCO2e), an
efficient cookstove could earn upwards of €30 assuming a three year
life. This level of funding should be sufficient to completely fund
the supply of cookstoves to poor communities although care should
be taken to ensure that any such programme is based on a
commercially sustainable financial model. With such a potential
source of funds, why are there not lots of cookstove programmes
being undertaken? The answer to that question lies in the
complexity of the mechanisms governing the certification of carbon
reduction credits or Offsets.
The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) of the Kyoto Protocol was
initially thought to be a potential source of funds for development
projects. At the time, Dick Jones - Senior Energy Adviser to DFID -
had high hopes that a new source of finance would be available to
provide basic energy services to the poor. However, Dick - now with
CarbonAided - says the development test of a CDM project is little
more than a tick in the box and in many, if not most cases,
provided no harm is done the project will be validated.
Some organisations, like the Gold Standard, are trying to increase
the developmental impacts and Certified Emission Reductions (CERs)
from projects with a good development story to tell, so that the
projects can command higher carbon prices. However, at the time of
writing, although there have been a number of discussions on the
topic, the CDM doesn’t currently support cookstove projects unless
they replace fossil fuel (although after recent discussions at COP
13 in Bali this may change soon). This is fine for places like
China where coal is a major fuel but in most of the poorest
communities in Africa and Asia this is not the case and CDM
projects are not possible.
An alternative is the voluntary market but this can also present
difficulties. For a project activity to be certified it needs to be
subjected to a similar analysis to that required by the CDM. This
requires establishing a baseline before the project and the
situation after the project using approved methodologies. Since at
present there are no CDM approved methodologies dealing with
cookstove projects for which the baseline is unsustainable biomass
we come back to the same problem (again this may hopefully change
after negotiations at COP13). Though the Gold Standard is working
on a cookstove methodology based on non-sustainable biomass, it
will be some months before this will be finalised. The Gold
Standard is thus ruled out for the time being.
The Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS) is another possibility.
However, most independent validators using the VCS work with
existing methodologies wherever these are available though they are
able to validate project activities and verify emission reductions
from similar projects provided that a convincing case can be made.
But this in turn is a more complicated process than for a project
with an approved methodology. An independent organisation that is
registered with the UNFCCC has advised that they would first need
to assess the methodology proposed, either a modified CDM or new
one, for suitability for submission under the VCS. It would then be
subject to a peer-review process and then be accepted or not by the
VCS program.
However, all is not lost. An independent Validator advised that “If
the unsustainable biomass is the only change to an approved CDM
meth, we could maybe push this through the VCS as a deviation and
not a completely new meth. I know that the VCS has a positive
attitude towards unsustainable biomass.” The VCS have confirmed
that any project that uses a new methodology would need to be
validated, then peer reviewed, and that they have no methodology
available for cookstoves based on non-sustainable biomass.
CarbonAided, like other similar organisations, are trying to
develop our own methodologies but there is a need for a coordinated
push to get the CDM and Gold Standard to approve methodologies that
will cover cookstove projects replacing non-sustainable biomass.
They believe in working with organsations and networks such as
HEDON,
Practical Action,
GTZ
and others in order to push this forward and the D (for
Development) put back into the CDM in this most important
area.
See also
Carbon Aided Limited United Kingdom
[top]
[end]Download the original article
Can Carbon Finance
Clean Cooking? by Dick Jones (376 KB)
[top]
[end]Contents: Boiling Point 54 - Climate change and
household energy
.
|
Theme Editorial - Carbon finance for clean
cooking – time to grasp the opportunity -
BP54:Health and Greenhouse Gas Impacts in
Africa -
BP54:Carbon Finance for Healthy Kitchens -
BP54:Critique of GHG stove assessment
methods -
BP54: Practical Action CO2 offsetting
experience -
BP54: Credible Carbon Offsets for African
Households -
BP54: GTZ News -
BP54: Practical Action News -
BP54: Marine conservation and energy efficient
stoves -
BP54: Can Carbon Finance Clean Cooking? -
BP54: Rates of smoke emissions -
BP54: A Polyethylene Dome for Biogas Plants
-
BP54: HEDON news
edit this page