Highlights -- 65th meeting of the CDM Executive Board

Highlights -- 65th meeting of the CDM Executive Board

Highlights -- 65th meeting of the CDM Executive Board

Board adopts comprehensive standards
intended to enhance clarity and quality

For the full report of the meeting see <http://cdm.unfccc.int/EB/index.html>.

Durban, South Africa, 25 November 2011 – At its 65th meeting, the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) Executive Board adopted three comprehensive standards to guide the assessment work of third party certifiers and project participants.

The new project validation and verification standard, project standard and project cycle procedure, mostly compilations and consolidations of existing rules that govern the CDM, had been in process for most of the year and had been before the Board at each of its past three meetings.

“These new documents pull together and make clear the bulk of the rules that govern the CDM. They will help remove any guesswork in the existing rules, thus help speed up processes and contribute to higher quality submissions,” said CDM Board Vice-Chair Maosheng Duan.

Also at its 65th meeting, the Board approved a sampling standard, which is expected facilitate development of programmes of activities (PoA); default values and work programme for guidelines for sector-specific standardized baselines; and procedures for designated national authorities to propose renewable energy technologies eligible for automatic qualification with regard to additionality. Emission reductions under CDM must go beyond -- be additional -- to business as usual.

The Board also adopted a revised version of the CDM methodology (AM0001) for projects that destroy HFC-23, an extremely potent greenhouse gas. The methodology was placed on hold a year ago, when the Board asked its Methodologies Panel to come up with a revision to enhance the methodology’s stringency.

Also at the meeting, the Board decided to place on hold and revise the methodology for projects that reduce emissions through the more efficient burning of fossil fuels. The decision was in response to a report prepared by the Board’s Methodologies Panel.