Close this search box.

Press Release: Pressure on EU mounts as UNFCCC suspends flawed rules for coal offsetting projects

Durban, South Africa. In a crucial move, the UN’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) Executive Board yesterday suspended coal power offsetting projects because the rules used to calculate emission reductions cause artificial carbon credits. Pressure on the EU is mounting to call for a ban of these projects at the climate change conference starting next week in Durban.

In open letters to European Environment Ministers sent yesterday, major environmental organisations including WWF, Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth called to permanently exclude coal power projects from the CDM during the upcoming climate negotiations in Durban. They also called for a ban of carbon credits from coal power projects in Europe´s Emissions Trading Scheme. The signatories warned that billions of Euros could be spent on projects that undermine climate targets while locking-in billions of tons of CO2 and causing severe human health and ecosystems damage.

Joris den Blanken, Greenpeace Unit Europe commented “With Europe facing major debt problems, the last thing ministers should be doing is paying for polluting coal plants abroad.”

In a recent study, the UN’s Methodologies Panel had identified deep flaws in the rules for CDM coal power projects that could cause millions of artificial carbon credits. Yesterday, members of the CDM Executive Board decided unanimously to suspend the crediting rules for CDM coal power projects. The Board tasked the Panel to present revised rules at their next meeting in early 2012. Yet revised new rules will not apply for already registered projects. The six projects that are already registered could receive about 90 million credits under the flawed rules.

“We welcome the suspension of the methodology. However it is not feasible to revise the methodology to address the flaws and guarantee real emissions reductions” comments Anja Kollmuss from CDM Watch.

The study by the Methodologies Panel did not evaluate whether the coal power projects fulfil the CDM’s essential additionality requirement. Yet an in-depth study by the Stockholm Environment Institute gives overwhelming evidence that these coal power plants are being built regardless of the CDM support. Business-as-usual projects are not allowed under the CDM because they cause an increase in emissions and therefore undermine climate protection goals.

“Even if the technical shortcomings identified by the Meth Panel could be addressed, coal projects are neither clean nor sustainable,” said Justin Guay from Sierra Club. “CDM financing only perpetuates the use of the world’s most carbon intensive fossil fuel coal. An outcome that is neither clean, sustainable, or justifiable in a carbon constrained world.”


Additional Information

Contact Information

Anja Kollmuss (CDM Watch) CET
+41 77 485 3667

Justin Guay (Sierra Club) EST
+1 202 664 6460


Related posts

Pricing the priceless: Lessons for biodiversity credits from carbon markets

Biodiversity markets are meant to channel private sector funding towards schemes that aim to conserve and restore biodiversity. In its current form, the unregulated funding schemes are reminiscent of the voluntary carbon market, which has a track record of supplying poor quality, cheap credits that inadequately transfer funds to the Global South. 

Going for green: Is the Paris Olympics winning the race against the climate clock?

Aware of the impact of the games on the climate and of record temperatures on the games, organisers of the Paris games have pledged to break records when it comes to reducing the impact of this mega event on the planet. ‘Going for Green’, a Carbon Market Watch and éclaircies report assessing the credibility of these plans reveals that if completely implemented, only 30% of the expected carbon footprint is covered by a robust climate strategy.

Lost in Documentation

Navigating the maze of project documentation

A new report by Carbon Market Watch has raised concerns over a lack of transparency and accountability within the unregulated voluntary carbon market caused by the unavailability of important project documents from the four biggest carbon crediting standards.

Join our mailing list

Stay in touch and receive our monthly newsletter, campaign updates, event invites and more.