70 likes | 157 Views
Sinks Projects in Bank Carbon Finance Operations and Issues Arising. The Kyoto Protocol: Eligibility of Carbon Sinks Projects 15 November, 2001. The Deals. Advanced in Preparation Brazil “Plantar”: Sustainable Fuelwood and Charcoal Romania Afforestation Concept Note Stage
E N D
Sinks Projects in Bank Carbon Finance Operationsand Issues Arising The Kyoto Protocol: Eligibility of Carbon Sinks Projects 15 November, 2001
The Deals • Advanced in Preparation • Brazil “Plantar”: Sustainable Fuelwood and Charcoal • Romania Afforestation • Concept Note Stage • Mexico, Oaxaca Hillsides Agroforestry • Has detailed feasibility study and demonstration farms • Brazil Amazon, Agroforestry • Part of ongoing PPG7 operations
Brazil Plantar • 23,000 ha of clonal high yield Eucalypts on end of third rotation low yielding plantation lands and pasture • FSC certification on existing plantations • 473.8ha of cerrado ecosystem rehabilitation from degraded plantations and pasture • Vision of 100,000 ha landscape management project integrating production, rehabilitation and conservation forestry • Prelimary Validation; PAD draft, Terms Sheet for carbon purchase; mid December carbon contract
Romania • 7,000 ha of robinia and poplar on degraded agricultural land owned by State (1/3) and local communities (2/3) • Permanent conservation forest rehabilitation on pasture land and a Danube River island reserve • Protection against erosion + biodiversity benefits • Community forestry program with issues of ownership and management • Project Concept Note by end-December, PCF carbon purchase by June 2002
Mexico • Oaxacan Hillsides: 35-55% slope • Agroforestry replacing slash and burn models with 0-400t/ha soil loss and permanently degraded forest or grasslands • Altitude determined tree crops and packages (no-till, legume crops etc, apples, peaches, walnuts, coffee) • 1-4 t Carbon/ha/yr from dry to moist zones • Project preparation (PIN/PCN) phase; carbon neutral program financing
Eligibility Issues • PCF Preference: • a conventional CDM baseline approach where the without project case is subjected to baseline study, MVP, and independent validation (as per Plantar case) • Screening criteria to include in baseline and for validation • Possible Uncertainties and Constraints? • Narrow definition of Afforestation and reforestation? What seems acceptable and what are the key definitional issues • Example: Starting point cannot be an existing forest regardless of increasing carbon density unit area • What is the definition of a forest? Who determines? • Less than 10-30% closed canopy, and trees from 1-5m high?
Policy Issues • Conversion of native forests • Presumably can’t clear native forest to plant plantation • Linking 3.3/3.4 requirements in accounting for sinks to CDM eligibility?, e.g. 1990 land use status? • Permanence? Time horizons? Buyer or Seller liability? Note Plantar case. • Leakage: how to control, monitor, and condition carbon finance on outcomes? Practicalities of imposing this burden on private sector or community level.