DOCSLIB.ORG

Leveraging Domestic Offset Projects for a Climate-Neutral World Regulatory Conditions and Options Editorial Information

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Leveraging Domestic Offset Projects for a Climate-Neutral World Regulatory Conditions and Options Editorial Information Leveraging domestic offset projects for a climate-neutral world Regulatory conditions and options Editorial information Publisher German Emissions Trading Authority (DEHSt) at the German Environment Agency Bismarckplatz 1 D-14193 Berlin Phone: +49 (0) 30 89 03-50 50 Fax: +49 (0) 30 89 03-50 10 [email protected] Internet: www.dehst.de/EN Status: March 2017 Authors Katharima Nett Stephan Wolters adelphi consult GmbH Alt-Moabit 91 10559 Berlin Responsible editors Section E 1.6: Corinna Gather Emilio Martin-Rodriguez Project number: 60392 Cover image: Tkemot/ Shutterstock.com The authors wish to thank Lucio Brotto, Patrick Bürgi, Marta Hernandez de la Cruz, Julian Ekelhof, Aric Gliesche, Julia Grimault, Simon Henry, Daniel Scholz, Luc Wittebolle, Vicky West and all the participants of the consulta- tion workshop for commenting on this paper and/or sharing their insights and experiences. Needless to say, this does not imply that they necessarily endorse the analysis and recommendations. Thanks also to Tristan Heß, William Hull and Stella Schaller for their research and editorial support. Abstract Voluntary domestic offset schemes offer great potential as instruments for advancing ambitious climate action and supporting the transformation towards low-carbon economies. At the same time, their possible scope of action in countries with reduction targets is limited: Mitigation commitments from the Kyoto Protocol, the EU ETS and national or subnational compliance mechanisms enhance the risk of different forms of double counting and demand guidance on additionality. Adding to these challenges, the regulatory framework will change by 2020. This study carried out by adelphi on behalf of the German Emissions Trading Authority (DEHSt) at the German Environmental Agency (UBA) analyses the characteristics of initiatives in countries that generate carbon credits from domestic projects for being used mainly as voluntary offsets. It identifies respective challenges and oppor- tunities and develops recommendations for improving regulatory conditions in order to advance the develop- ment of a domestic voluntary market and leverage its potential for a climate-neutral world. The recommendations include: ▸ No more niches: Regulative framework needs to proactively safeguard environmental integrity. Where emissions reductions are counted towards national targets, governments could cancel Assigned Amount Units (AAUs) or commit to not selling excess AAUs. Transparent communication can alleviate concerns that double claiming can undermine perceived environmental integrity. ▸ Assess and endorse existing voluntary carbon standards: Official government endorsement (or by another central institution) of voluntary offset mechanisms could offer the opportunity to build on credible standards and use existing infrastructure instead of creating parallel structures that increase the risk of double coun- ting. An endorsement could take the form of a positive list of recognized standards or provide certain benchmarks. ▸ Leverage the potential of the LULUCF / AFOLU sector: As the international community is aiming for a carbon-neutral world by the end of the century, carbon sinks will become more and more important. Most domestic offset initiatives are active in this sector, thereby providing significant experience in developing and implementing emission reduction and removal projects that the compliance market can learn from. ▸ Close the ambition gap with voluntary action: What seems to be a contradiction – using voluntary domestic offsets for compliance – may, in fact, help to get on track with ambitious climate targets. This can, for example, inform discussions on the Paris Agreement, in particular article 6.4. Kurzbeschreibung Der freiwillige inländische Markt für Treibhausgaskompensation bietet ein großes Potenzial als Instrument für ambitionierten Klimaschutz und den Übergang zur kohlenstoffarmen Wirtschaft. Zugleich schränken Minde- rungsverpflichtungen aus dem Kyoto-Protokoll, dem EU-Emissionshandelssystem (EU ETS) und der nationalen oder subnationalen Ebene den Gestaltungsspielraum ein. Hinzu kommt, dass sich der regulative Rahmen ab 2020 ändert. Diese Studie von adelphi im Auftrag der Deutschen Emissionshandelsstelle (DEHSt) im Umweltbundesamt (UBA) analysiert die Eigenschaften und Voraussetzungen von Initiativen in den Ländern, die Kohlenstoffzertifi- kate aus inländischen Projekten für freiwillige Kompensationen generiert haben. Ziel der Studie ist es, die Herausforderungen und Chancen für nationale Klimaschutzprojekte im freiwilligen Kompensationsmarkt zu beleuchten und Vorschläge zur Verbesserung der Rahmenbedingungen für die Entfaltung eines inländischen freiwilligen Kompensationsmarkts zu entwickeln – und damit der Vision einer klimaneutralen Welt näher zu kommen. Es lassen sich einige Empfehlungen ableiten: ▸ Keine Nischen mehr: Der Regulierungsrahmen kann Doppelzählung vermeiden helfen. Wo Emissionsredukti- onen auf nationale Ziele angerechnet werden, können Staaten Assigned Amount Units (AAUs) löschen oder sich verpflichten, frei werdende AAUs nicht zu verkaufen. Eine transparente Kommunikation kann vermeiden, dass double claiming die wahrgenommene Umweltintegrität beeinträchtigt. ▸ Freiwillige Qualitätsstandards bewerten und empfehlen: Der Staat oder eine andere zentrale Stelle könnte freiwillige Qualitätsstandards prüfen und empfehlen. Damit könnte auf etablierten Standards aufgebaut werden und bereits existierende Infrastruktur genutzt werden, statt parallele Strukturen zu schaffen, die das Risiko von Doppelzählungen erhöhen. Dies könnte zum Beispiel durch eine Positivliste anerkannter Stan- dards oder die Festlegung von Mindestanforderungen erfolgen. ▸ Potential des LULUCF- bzw. AFOLU-Sektors ausschöpfen: Da die internationale Gemeinschaft eine klimaneu- trale Welt bis Ende des Jahrhunderts anstrebt, werden Kohlenstoffsenken eine immer größere Rolle spielen. Die meisten inländischen Kompensationsinitiativen sind in diesem Sektor aktiv und haben daher viel Erfahrung mit der Entwicklung und Umsetzung von Projekten zur Emissionsreduktion und in Senkenpro- jekten, von der der Verpflichtungsmarkt lernen könnte. ▸ Ambitionslücke mit freiwilligen Aktivitäten schließen: Was als Widerspruch erscheint – freiwillige inländi- sche Kompensationen für Verpflichtungsziele zu nutzen – kann dazu beitragen, die ambitionierten Klima- ziele zu erreichen. Das kann auch für die weiteren Verhandlungen zur Ausgestaltung des Pariser Abkommens von Interesse sein – insbesondere zu Artikel 6.4. 4 Leveraging domestic offset projects for a climate-neutral world: Regulatory conditions and options Content 1 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................35 2 Concepts and definitions ........................................................................................................................35 2.1 Domestic offset projects ...........................................................................................................35 2.2 Obstacles for domestic projects.................................................................................................36 2.2.1 Additionality .....................................................................................................................36 2.2.2 Types of double counting ...................................................................................................37 3 Policy background: framework conditions for domestic projects .............................................................45 3.1 International framework: Kyoto Protocol ....................................................................................45 3.1.1 Background: Regulative conditions.....................................................................................45 3.1.2 Implications for domestic offset projects ............................................................................47 3.2 The European framework ...........................................................................................................49 3.2.1 Background: regulative conditions .....................................................................................49 3.2.2 Implications for domestic offset projects ............................................................................51 3.3 National framework: domestic offset projects in Germany ...........................................................53 3.3.1 Regulative framework ........................................................................................................53 3.3.2 Cost effectiveness of domestic projects ..............................................................................54 4 Voluntary offset schemes in Annex I countries ........................................................................................54 4.1 Analytical framework ................................................................................................................55 4.1.1 Overview of the initiative ...................................................................................................55 4.1.2 Integration of the initiative in the pre-2020 framework ........................................................57 4.2 Australia ..................................................................................................................................57 4.2.1 Overview of the initiative ...................................................................................................57
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Has Joint Implementation Reduced GHG Emissions? Lessons Learned for the Design of Carbon Market Mechanisms
    Stockholm Environment Institute, Working Paper 2015-07 Has Joint Implementation reduced GHG emissions? Lessons learned for the design of carbon market mechanisms Anja Kollmuss, Lambert Schneider and Vladyslav Zhezherin Stockholm Environment Institute Linnégatan 87D 104 51 Stockholm Sweden Tel: +46 8 674 7070 Fax: +46 8 674 7020 Web: www.sei-international.org Author contact: Anja Kollmuss, [email protected] Director of Communications: Robert Watt Editors: Elaine Beebe and Marion Davis Cover photo: A steel plant in Ukraine with a coal waste heap in the background. Photo © Mykola Ivashchenko. This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educa- tional or non-profit purposes, without special permission from the copyright holder(s) provided acknowledgement of the source is made. No use of this publication may be made for resale or other commercial purpose, without the written permission of the copyright holder(s). About SEI Working Papers: The SEI working paper series aims to expand and accelerate the availability of our research, stimulate discussion, and elicit feedback. SEI working papers are work in progress and typically contain preliminary research, analysis, findings, and recom- mendations. Many SEI working papers are drafts that will be subsequently revised for a refereed journal or book. Other papers share timely and innovative knowledge that we consider valuable and policy-relevant, but which may not be intended for later publication. Copyright © August 2015 by Stockholm Environment Institute STOCKHOLM ENVIRONMENT INSTITUTE WORKING PAPER NO. 2015-07 Has Joint Implementation reduced GHG emissions? Lessons learned for the design of carbon market mechanisms Anja Kollmuss, Lambert Schneider Stockholm Environment Institute – U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Supplementarity Challenge: CDM, JI & EU Emissions Trading
    Policy Paper Nr. 1/2004 Erstellt im März 2004 The Supplementarity Challenge: CDM, JI & EU Emissions Trading This policy paper is a contribution to the ongoing discussion on the Commission’s proposal for a directive ‘amending the Directive 2003/…/EC establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community, in respect of the Kyoto Protocol’s project mechanisms’ (henceforward called Proposed Directive and ET Directive respectively). It is largely based on a policy brief that has been produced within the framework of the IEEP/Ecologic contract ‘External expertise on emerging regulatory and policy issues within the responsibility of the EP Environment Committee’ (project EP/IV/A/2003/09/01). This policy brief can be downloaded from the European Parliaments website at http://www.europarl.eu.int/comparl/envi/externalexpertise/default_en.htm. The focus of this paper is on the question of supplementarity in the context of linking the project-based mechanisms CDM and JI to the EU Emission Allowance Trading. The EU 15 as a whole as well as many of its member states will find it very difficult to achieve compliance with the Kyoto Protocol. It might therefore become necessary to make use of the flexibility provided by the Kyoto Protocol. However, the EU’s credibility crucially depends on meeting the supplementarity requirement, i.e. achieving at least 50% of its emission reductions through domestic action. The relevant provision contained in the Proposed Directive is not comprehensive enough to guarantee this outcome, the authors therefore recommend that a more wide-ranging approach is taken. Introduction: The Situation in the EU with Respect to Compliance with the Kyoto Protocol Most of the EU 15 member states will have to make significant additional efforts to achieve compliance with the Kyoto Protocol.
    [Show full text]
  • Carbon Dioxide Removal Policy in the Making: Assessing Developments in 9 OECD Cases
    POLICY AND PRACTICE REVIEWS published: 04 March 2021 doi: 10.3389/fclim.2021.638805 Carbon Dioxide Removal Policy in the Making: Assessing Developments in 9 OECD Cases Felix Schenuit 1,2*, Rebecca Colvin 3, Mathias Fridahl 4, Barry McMullin 5, Andy Reisinger 6, Daniel L. Sanchez 7, Stephen M. Smith 8, Asbjørn Torvanger 9, Anita Wreford 10 and Oliver Geden 2 1 Center for Sustainable Society Research, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany, 2 German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP), Berlin, Germany, 3 Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia, 4 Department of Thematic Studies, Environmental Change, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden, 5 Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland, 6 Ministry for the Environment, Wellington, New Zealand, 7 Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management (ESPM), University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, United States, 8 Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom, 9 Center for International Climate Research (CICERO), Oslo, Norway, 10 Agribusiness and Economics Research Unit (AERU), Lincoln University, Christchurch, New Zealand Edited by: William C. Burns, Since the adoption of the Paris Agreement in 2015, spurred by the 2018 IPCC Special American University, United States Report on Global Warming of 1.5◦C, net zero emission targets have emerged as a Reviewed by: new organizing principle of climate policy. In this context, climate policymakers and Phillip Williamson, University of East Anglia, stakeholders have been shifting their attention to carbon dioxide removal (CDR) as United Kingdom an inevitable component of net zero targets. The importance of CDR would increase Charithea Charalambous, Heriot-Watt University, further if countries and other entities set net-negative emissions targets.
    [Show full text]
  • Carbon Innovation for Business Impact
    Carbon Innovation for Business Impact Accelerating climate solutions and private sector finance to make real change possible Contents Executive summary ............................................................................................. 3 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 4 Advancing practical and scalable solutions ................................................ 6 Evaluating carbon finance projects ............................................................... 8 Proven methodologies ................................................................................ 9 Emerging methodologies .........................................................................13 High-potential technologies ...................................................................15 Experimental technologies .....................................................................16 Adding value with values.................................................................................17 Delivering quality carbon credits .................................................................19 Ensuring credible standards ..........................................................................20 Conclusion ............................................................................................................22 Teak Afforestation, Mexico Cover Photo: SELCO Solar Energy Access, India 2 Executive summary Since the Paris Agreement was existing and new methodologies to signed
    [Show full text]
  • Greenhouse Gas Removal (GGR) Policy Options – Final Report
    Greenhouse Gas Removal (GGR) policy options – Final Report Report prepared for BEIS Final June 2019 Greenhouse Gas Removal (GGR) policy options – Final Report Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 7 1 Scale and cost of future Greenhouse Gas Removal ........................................................................... 9 2 The need for a policy portfolio to support GGRs ............................................................................. 17 3 Review of current GGR policies ....................................................................................................... 22 4 Policy pathways to support GGR ..................................................................................................... 25 5 Enabling and integrating policies ..................................................................................................... 41 6 Frequently Asked Questions ............................................................................................................ 50 7 References ....................................................................................................................................... 52 8 Appendix: Assessment of direct policies ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • England Tree Strategy Erattum
    Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs England Tree Strategy Consultation - Technical Annex June 2020 Erattum 17th August 2020: The estimate of vacant land on page 11 has been updated to replace an error and explain the source of the estimate on page 12 of the consultation document. Contents Erattum ................................................................................................................................ 1 General background, ............................................................................................................ 1 Expanding and connecting our woods ................................................................................. 3 Ambition ........................................................................................................................... 4 Creating space for nature ................................................................................................. 5 Planting trees for water .................................................................................................... 6 Helping landowners create woodlands ............................................................................. 8 Working together to create landscape scale change ...................................................... 10 Restoring degraded land ................................................................................................ 11 Funding future woodland creation – markets for ecosystem services such as carbon ... 12 Supplying the trees we need to plant and
    [Show full text]
  • WWC V2.0 08March2018.Pdf
    Woodland Carbon Code Requirements for voluntary carbon sequestration projects ® Version 2.0 March 2018 © Crown Copyright 2018 You may re-use this information (not Contents including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit: www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/ open-government-licence or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Introduction 1 Archives, Kew, London, TW9 4DU or e-mail: [email protected] 1. Eligibility 4 Version 2.0 published March 2018 1.1 Key project dates 4 1.2 Eligible activities 5 ISBN 978-0-85538-843-0 1.3 Eligible land 5 FCMS017/FC-GB(KA)/0K/MAR2018 1.4 Compliance with the law 6 Enquiries relating to this publication should 1.5 Conformance to the UK Forestry Standard 6 be sent to: 1.6 Additionality 7 [email protected] 2. Project governance 8 2.1 Commitment of landowners and project/group managers 8 2.2 Management plan 9 2.3 Management of risks and permanence 10 2.4 Consultation 11 2.5 Monitoring 11 2.6 Registry and avoidance of double counting 12 2.7 Carbon statements and reporting 13 3. Carbon sequestration 14 3.1 Carbon baseline 14 3.2 Carbon leakage 15 3.3 Project carbon sequestration 15 3.4 Net carbon sequestration 16 4. Environmental quality 17 5. Social responsibility 18 Glossary 19 O2 CO2 C C Introduction Background and purpose Application Process Trees and forests can mitigate climate change through Registration sequestering carbon. Woodland creation therefore All projects should be registered on the UK Woodland provides an attractive option for companies, organisations Carbon Registry within two years of the start of planting.
    [Show full text]
  • STATE of EUROPEAN MARKETS 2017 Voluntary Carbon
    STATE OF EUROPEAN MARKETS 2017 Voluntary Carbon MAIN PARTNER PROMOTED BY ABOUT FOREST TRENDS’ ECOSYSTEM MARKETPLACE Ecosystem Marketplace, an initiative of the non-profit organisation Forest Trends, is the leading global source of information on environmental finance, markets, and payments for ecosystem services. As a web-based service, Ecosystem Marketplace publishes newsletters, breaking news, original feature articles, and annual reports about market-based approaches to valuing and financing ecosystem services. We believe that transparency is a hallmark of robust markets and that by providing accessible and trustworthy information on prices, regulation, science, and other market-relevant issues, we can contribute to market growth, catalyse new thinking, and spur the development of new markets, and the policies and infrastructure needed to support them. Ecosystem Marketplace is financially supported by a diverse set of organisations including multilateral and bilateral government agencies, private foundations, and corporations involved in banking, investment, and various ecosystem services. Forest Trends works to conserve forests and other ecosystems through the creation and wide adoption of a broad range of environmental finance, markets and other payment and incentive mechanisms. Forest Trends does so by 1) providing transparent information on ecosystem values, finance, and markets through knowledge acquisition, analysis, and dissemination; 2) convening diverse coalitions, partners, and communities of practice to promote environmental
    [Show full text]
  • Ecosystem Marketplace
    $15 /ha $86/ha $209/ha $7/ha $13/ha $13/ha Covering New Ground State of the Forest Carbon Markets 2013 Premium Sponsors Sponsors About Forest Trendsʼ Ecosystem Marketplace Ecosystem Marketplace, an initiative of the non-profi t organization Forest Trends, is a leading source of information on environmental markets and payments for ecosystem services. Our publicly available information sources include annual reports, quantitative market tracking, weekly articles, daily news, and news briefs designed for different payments for ecosystem services stakeholders. We believe that by providing solid and trustworthy information on prices, regulation, science, and other market-relevant issues, we can help payments for ecosystem services and incentives for reducing pollution become a fundamental part of our economic and environmental systems, helping make the priceless valuable. Ecosystem Marketplace is fi nancially supported by organizations such as the Skoll Foundation, the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, the International Climate Initiative (Germany), the Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit/Federal Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development (Germany), the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, PROFOR (the World Bank’s Program on Forests), as well as sponsors and supporters of this report. Forest Trends is a Washington, DC-based international non-profi t organization whose mission is to maintain, restore, and enhance forests and connected natural ecosystems, which provide life-sustaining processes, by promoting incentives stemming from a broad range of ecosystem services and products. Specifi cally, Forest Trends seeks to catalyze the development of integrated carbon, water, and biodiversity incentives that deliver real conservation outcomes and benefi ts to local communities and other stewards of our natural resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Carbon Sequestration in Agricultural Soils
    Carbon Sequestration in Agricultural Soils A Multidisciplinary Approach to Innovative Methods Bearbeitet von Alessandro Piccolo 1. Auflage 2012. Buch. xiv, 310 S. Hardcover ISBN 978 3 642 23384 5 Format (B x L): 15,5 x 23,5 cm Gewicht: 649 g Weitere Fachgebiete > Geologie, Geographie, Klima, Umwelt > Geologie > Bodenkunde, Sedimentologie Zu Inhaltsverzeichnis schnell und portofrei erhältlich bei Die Online-Fachbuchhandlung beck-shop.de ist spezialisiert auf Fachbücher, insbesondere Recht, Steuern und Wirtschaft. Im Sortiment finden Sie alle Medien (Bücher, Zeitschriften, CDs, eBooks, etc.) aller Verlage. Ergänzt wird das Programm durch Services wie Neuerscheinungsdienst oder Zusammenstellungen von Büchern zu Sonderpreisen. Der Shop führt mehr als 8 Millionen Produkte. Chapter 2 The Kyoto Protocol and European and Italian Regulations in Agriculture Davide Savy, Antonio Nebbioso, Rocı´oDa´nica Co´ndor, and Marina Vitullo Abstract Climate change represents the most important challenge for the interna- tional scientific community, for the inherent and irreversible modification brought about in natural ecosystems. International institutions increasingly adopt measures to promote preservation of ecosystems and counteract the social and economical consequences of environmental decline. Here we review the actions undertaken by both the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), aimed to stabilize and reduce concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHG) in atmosphere, including the Kyoto Protocol that obliges developed countries to provide the political and legal framework to meet the Protocol’s expectations. Moreover, it is mandatory for national policies to reduce the occurrence of main risky events, such as landslides, floods, and desertification processes, whose frequency have rapidly risen in the Mediterranean regions mostly susceptible to climatic changes.
    [Show full text]
  • 4. Markets for Carbon Offsets
    4. Markets for carbon offsets Widely dismissed as far-fetched only a few years ago, today there is a strengthening scientific consensus that global warming is a real and dangerous phenomenon. Global warming results from what scientists refer to as the Greenhouse Effect, which is caused by the build up of greenhouse gases (GHGs) including carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxides, chlorofluorocarbons, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulphur hexafluoride, in the atmosphere. GHGs absorb heat radiated from the Earth’s surface and, in the past, have been responsible for maintaining the Earth’s temperature at an average 15 degrees Celsius. Over the twentieth century the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change, an international group of leading climate scientists set up to advise the United Nations’ Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), estimates that a 30% increase in atmospheric GHG levels has caused world temperatures to rise 0.6 degrees Celsius. By far the largest contributor has been fossil fuel burning, which accounts for about 75% of the increase in GHG, followed by forest degradation and deforestation, accounting for an estimated 20%. The Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change has predicted that at present rates, temperatures will increase by a further 1.4 – 5.8 degrees Celsius over the next 100 years (IPCC, 2001). The increase in global temperatures will have uncertain implications for humans, but the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change posits several potential impacts including rising sea levels, more severe climatic events, coastal erosion, increased salinisation, loss of protective coral reefs, increased desertification, damaged forest ecosystems and increased disease. Poor people are particularly vulnerable to global warming.
    [Show full text]
  • Forestry for a Low-Carbon Future
    177 177 FAO FORESTRY PAPER Forestry for a low-carbon future Forestry for a low-carbon future Forestry for a low-carbon future Integrating forests and wood products Integrating forests and wood products in climate change strategies in climate change strategie s Forests are critical to mitigation, having a dual role; they function globally as a net carbon sink but are also responsible for about 10 to 12 percent of global emissions. Forests and forest products offer both – developed and developing countries a wide range of Integrating forests and wood products in climate change strategies options for timely and cost-effective mitigation. Afforestation/reforestation offers the best option because of its short timescale and ease of implementation. Reducing deforestation, forest management and forest restoration also offer good mitigation potential, especially because of the possibility for immediate action. Yet forest contributions to mitigation also go beyond forest activities. Wood products and wood energy can replace fossil-intense products in other sectors, creating a virtuous cycle towards low-carbon economies. The mitigation potential and costs of the various options differ greatly by activity, region, system boundaries and time horizon. Policymakers must decide on the optimal mix of options, adapted to local circumstances, for meeting national climate change and development goals. This publication assesses the options and highlights the enabling conditions, opportunities and potential bottlenecks to be considered in making apt choices.
    [Show full text]