Today is Wednesday, 19 June 2024.
This heading is the sub-title related to carbon credits, as it appears in a main press release after the Bonn Climate Change Conference.
After two weeks of working meetings, it highlights a range of issues that need to progress before the UN Climate Change Conference (COP29) from 11 to 22 November 2024 in Baku, Azerbaijan. And COP30 next year in Brazil.
Sounds positive the information that “delegates made important strides on key technical aspects of Article 6, including carbon credit authorization, activity scope, the international carbon market registry and more”.
You may recall, as we elaborated in two posts, the 11 difficult questions (Annex) proposed by the Supervisory Body (SB) to the country representatives towards operationalizing a new global carbon market.
The questions are detailed as an Annex, after this article. And here you can also watch the recoding of the meeting with all discussions.
And it’s a lot of still open issues. So that the press release adds:
“Delegates also agreed to hold a workshop to further progress technical work on Article 6.2 and 6.4 ahead of November. As a result, they will be better placed to meet in Baku ready to finalize an outcome and move towards better carbon markets.”
“The UN Body responsible for operationalizing a new global carbon market under the Paris Agreement will meet twice ahead negotiations in Baku, to finalize recommendations on methodologies and emission removals”.
It was also indicated that the SB aims to finalize a Sustainable Development Tool in the run up to COP29, to establish environmental and social safeguards. Coincidentally on this topic, Gold Standard will host a SDG Impact Tool Training in the coming days. Soon more news about it.
The main press release mentioned at the beginning of this article is tilted “June Climate Meetings Take Modest Steps Forward; Steep Mountain Still to Climb Ahead of COP29”. You can read it fully by clicking at the image below.
Annex with Questions
General
Which important elements of guidance on methodologies and removals need to be reflected in recommendation to CMA 6, and which specific elements can be left for implementation in more detailed standards, guidance, guidelines, and tools?
What is the relationship between guidance under Article 6.4 and Article 5.2 of the Paris Agreement, including how could requirements for monitoring of removals (or emission reductions) interact with national requirements?
What is the relationship between guidance under Article 6.4 and Articles 2.1(c), Article 4.5, Articles 9, 10 and 11?
How might the SBM work better to secure the best technical and scientific input for its methodological work?
Methodological Guidance
How should the methodological principles stated in paragraph 33 of the RMP be applied to baseline approaches, in particular:
Whether application of concept of downward adjustment apply equally to the three baseline approaches?
Whether the methodological principles and their implementation apply equally to emission reductions and removals?
Whether further guidance and tools should consider the different uses of mitigation contribution units (MCUs), authorised credits ITMOs?
How might be the principles of additionality as specified in paragraph 36 of the RMP be implemented?
How should social and environmental and other protections and safeguards be reflected in the general guidance and the underlying SD tools?
Removals Guidance
Should further guidance differentiate requirements for different types of nature-based and technological removals?
Could elements of the removal guidance apply also to emission reductions, and what are they? And how might they be applied?
How might the responsibility to address reversal risk be attributed to or shared between participants, including Activity Participants, Host Party and the acquiring Party?
How is reversal risk to be addressed, and which tools are more appropriate in what circumstances?
