The current methodologies, scope and applicability gap - Alexandrina Platonova (World Bank Carbon Finance Unit)
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

The current methodologies, scope and applicability gap - Alexandrina Platonova (World Bank Carbon Finance Unit)

on

  • 2,385 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
2,385
Views on SlideShare
2,382
Embed Views
3

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
35
Comments
0

1 Embed 3

http://www.slideshare.net 3

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

The current methodologies, scope and applicability gap - Alexandrina Platonova (World Bank Carbon Finance Unit) The current methodologies, scope and applicability gap - Alexandrina Platonova (World Bank Carbon Finance Unit) Presentation Transcript

  • The current methodologies: applicability and scope CDM Methodology Workshop on Gas Flaring Amsterdam, December 3, 2008 Alexandrina Platonova-Oquab Carbon Finance Unit of the World Bank
  • Unlock CDM impact through appropriated methodologies
    • Limited success of CDM in reducing gas flaring
      • Only 3% of contracted CDM volumes in 2007
    • Why the opportunity is not picked-up yet ?
    • Methodologies are available but their applicability is restricted
    Source: De Gouvello, Dayo, Thioye (2008)
  • “ Working space” for flaring reduction methodologies Complex integrated systems Variety of utilization options Variety of flared gas origins Variety of market access options Variety of end users Measurement Monitoring Baseline assessment (scenarios) Project emissions Project boundary Project boundary Leakages
    • Significant gap remains between AM0009 “coverage” and the scope of practicable flaring reduction solutions
    • Concerns in relation to widening the scope:
      • Complex/ integrated flaring reduction options not fully recognized
      • Different origins of flared gas not accepted
      • Responses are referring to the insufficient set of AM0009 tools/scenarios
    Recent clarifications on applicability: filling the gaps?
    • Need for confidence building tools in the flaring reduction methodologies
    • Balanced approach to technicalities that supports the “generic” applicability of the methodology
    • Making use of lessons learned from other CDM methodologies:
      • “ Framework” approach (driven by ASM experience)
      • Combined approach (driven by ACM experience)
    • Substantial benefits of coordinated effort:
      • Combining larger scope of expertise & backgrounds
      • Access to comprehensive set of practical examples
      • Independent references on existing sound operational solutions and practices
    Possible ways forward: what is to be done to fill the gaps?