guidance for accounting: emissions intensity goals and goals relative to bau emissions levels under...
TRANSCRIPT
KELLY LEVIN SEPTEMBER 2016
GUIDANCE FOR ACCOUNTING: EMISSIONS
INTENSITY GOALS, AND GOALS RELATIVE
TO BAU EMISSIONS LEVELS UNDER
ARTICLE 4
TYPES OF CONTRIBUTIONS
INDCS: MITIGATION CONTRIBUTION TYPE
Source: CAIT climate data explorer (cait.wri.org)
INDCS: GHG TARGET TYPE
NEW ACCOUNTING NEEDS
• Will there be a requirement to quantify future emissions in the target year?
For all? For those who want to use markets?
– Relatedly, how to develop level against which corresponding
adjustment is made if ITMOs are used
• For intensity targets:
– Data sources for unit of output
• For baseline scenario targets:
– Definition of consistency and procedure for reviewing consistency
– Any additional guidance for baseline scenario development
• Inclusion of policies in baseline scenario and cut off year for
inclusion
• Projection methods, assumptions for key drivers, and data sources
WILL THERE BE A REQUIREMENT TO QUANTIFY FUTURE
EMISSIONS IN THE TARGET YEAR? FOR ALL? FOR
THOSE WHO WANT TO USE MARKETS?
Intensity targets: Calculating target year emissions level requires a projection of unit of output
Baseline scenario targets: Requires information on target level of emissions in the baseline scenario
If not quantified, how would progress be tracked?
HOW TO DEVELOP LEVEL AGAINST WHICH
CORRESPONDING ADJUSTMENT IS MADE IF ITMOS ARE
USED 37. Requests the Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice to develop and recommend the guidance referred to under Article 6, paragraph 2, of the Agreement for adoption by the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Paris Agreement at its first session, including guidance to ensure that double counting is avoided on the basis of a corresponding adjustment by Parties for both anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks covered by their nationally determined contributions under the Agreement;
• Previously had carbon budget to calculate reference level
INTENSITY TARGETS: ADDITIONAL ACCOUNTING
CONSIDERATIONS
• Data sources for unit of output may differ and be
unclear
• Will there be any guidance for unit of output?
– Recommendation: Data for the level of output should
come from official, peer-reviewed sources that are
publicly available and subject to robust QA/QC
procedures
ACCOUNTING CONSIDERATIONS FOR BASELINE
SCENARIO TARGETS
• What changes can be made to the baseline
scenario? What constitutes “consistency”? Will
there be a review procedure to assess consistency?
• Will there be additional guidance on baseline
scenario development?
ACCOUNTING CONSIDERATIONS FOR BASELINE
SCENARIO TARGETS
• What changes can be made to the baseline
scenario? What constitutes “consistency”? Will
there be a review procedure to assess consistency?
• Will there be additional guidance on baseline
scenario development?
DYNAMIC BASELINE SCENARIO GOALS
“METHODOLOGICAL CONSISTENCY” ON BASELINES
BETWEEN THE COMMUNICATION AND
IMPLEMENTATION OF NDCS
What is “consistent” and does not change during implementation:
• Whether static or dynamic?
– Recalculation policy for dynamic
• Inclusion of policies in baseline scenario and cut off year for
inclusion?
• Projection methods?
• Assumptions for key drivers?
• Data sources for drivers?
“METHODOLOGICAL CONSISTENCY” ON BASELINES
BETWEEN THE COMMUNICATION AND
IMPLEMENTATION OF NDCS
• To achieve consistency between communication and
implementation, will Parties be more forthcoming about
assumptions underlying baseline scenario (to assess
consistency)?
• Is the intention to allow for technical improvements, akin to
national GHG inventories and REDD+ reference levels?
• Would the elements that can be changed be clearly identified
before implementation? Will there be a common
recalculation policy across countries?
• Will there be any review procedures to assess consistency?
ACCOUNTING CONSIDERATIONS FOR BASELINE
SCENARIO TARGETS
• What changes can be made to the baseline
scenario? What constitutes “consistency”? Will
there be a review procedure to assess consistency?
• Will there be additional guidance on baseline
scenario development?
ACCOUNTING DECISIONS RELATED TO BASELINE
SCENARIO TARGETS
• Inclusion of policies in baseline scenario and cut off
year for inclusion
• Projection methods, assumptions for key drivers,
and data sources for drivers
INCLUSION OF POLICIES IN BASELINE SCENARIO
• Emissions will be affected by policies and actions implemented in the
jurisdiction
• This includes policies and actions designed to reduce emissions as
well as those designed to meet other objectives
• Which policies are included in the baseline scenario and the
assumptions made about their likely effects on emissions can have a
significant effect on resulting baseline scenario emissions
• Accounting decisions/reporting on:
– Policies and actions that are included in the baseline scenario
– Methods used to estimate the effects
– Justification for any significant policies excluded
– The cutoff year for the inclusion of policies
RECOMMENDATION
Parties should include all policies and actions that (1) have a significant
effect on GHG emissions, either increasing or decreasing them, and (2)
are implemented/adopted in the year the baseline scenario is developed
EXAMPLE: CHILE’S NATIONAL BASELINE
ASSUMPTIONS FOR KEY DRIVERS,
PROJECTION METHODS, AND DATA SOURCES
• Drivers: e.g., economic activity, energy prices,
population, land-use practices, etc.
• Assumptions for drivers
• Methods: Top-down vs. bottom-up vs. hybrid
models
• Data sources: what types of data sets (e.g. national,
international, etc)
ASSUMPTIONS MAKE A DIFFERENCE: E.G. CHILE
