greenhouse gas protocol: policy and action standard, mitigation goal standard

LAUNCH OF

GHG PROTOCOL

POLICY AND ACTION STANDARD &

MITIGATION GOAL STANDARD

21 NOVEMBER 2014

Manish Bapna

Executive Vice President and Managing Director, World Resources Institute

Pankaj Bhatia

Director, Greenhouse Gas Protocol, World Resources Institute

Key questions

• Are countries on track to meet their climate commitments?

• How effective are local or national policies to drive emissions reductions?

• Will countries’ actions add up to limit warming to under 2 degrees Celsius?

Source for carbon budget: IPCC AR5 Synthesis Report

Need for new standards

• New diversity of national GHG reduction goals

• Increased need to estimate GHG effects of policies and actions

• Lack of consistency and transparency in current approaches

• Lack of capacity

• No international guidelines until now

Overview of standards

How to estimate the

greenhouse gas effects of

policies and actions

How to assess progress toward

national or subnational GHG

emissions reduction goals

Policy and Action Standard

Before implementation:

What effect is a given policy or action likely to have on emissions

in the future?

During implementation: Is a given policy or action on track and delivering expected

results?

After implementation: What effect has a

given policy or action had on emissions?

Purpose of the standard

Governments (local, subnational, national), donor agencies and financial institutions, businesses, NGOs, and research institutes can use the standard to:

• Inform policy selection and design by comparing policy options based on their expected GHG effects

• Evaluate policy effectiveness (and cost-effectiveness) in delivering intended results

• Report on GHG effects of policies and actions

• Attract and facilitate financial support for mitigation actions by estimating GHG reductions

• Can also assess non-GHG effects (co-benefits) and costs

Objectives of assessing policy/action impact

Regulations and standards

Taxes Subsidies

Emissions trading programs

Voluntary agreements

Information instruments

Infrastructure programs

Implementation of new technologies,

processes, or practices

Financing and investment

Types of policies and actions

Define policy or action

Identify effects

Estimate baseline scenario emissions

Estimate policy

scenario emissions

Subtract to

estimate the GHG

effect

Overview of steps

Pilot example: German renewable energy law

Pilot example: Beijing ETS

6000

6250

6500

6750

7000

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

CO

2em

issi

on

s (1

0k

ton

s)

policy scenario

baseline scenario

policy scenario (only consider electricity related emission reduction)

Mitigation Goal Standard

Before the goal period: What factors

to consider when designing a goal and

how to calculate allowable emissions in the target year

During the goal period: How to

assess and report progress

After the goal period: How to

assess and report goal achievement

Purpose of the standard

Types of goals

Goal Type ExamplesReductions

in what?

Reductions

relative to

what?

Base year

emissions goal

Australia: 80% reduction below 2000 levels by

2050

New York City: 30% below 2005 levels by 2030

EmissionsHistorical

base year

Fixed level goal

Costa Rica: ‘long-term economy-wide

transformational effort to enable carbon-

neutrality’

Emissions

No

reference

level

Base year

intensity goal

China: 40-45% reduction in CO2 emissions per

unit of GDP by 2020 compared with the 2005

level

Emissions

intensity

Historical

base year

Baseline

scenario goal

Brazil: Between 36.1% and 38.9% below

projected emissions in 2020

South Africa: 34% deviation below BAU by

2020

Emissions

Projected

baseline

scenario

Pilot example: South Africa Mining Sector – tracking progress

Pilot example: United Kingdom – Multi-Year Goals

Process for developing the standards

Greenhouse Gas Protocol standards

Corporate Standard

Project Protocol

Product Standard

Corporate Value Chain

(Scope 3) Standard

Mitigation Goal Standard

Policy and Action Standard

Standard development process

Secretariat (WRI)

Advisory Committee (30)

Technical Working Groups (80)

Review Group (130)

Pilot Testers (30)

• 270 participants in 40 countries

Pilot testing: 32 policies/goals in 20 countries/cities

US

Mexico

Costa RicaColombia

Chile South Africa

Indonesia

Japan

South Korea

China

India

Bangladesh

Tunisia

UK BelgiumGermany

Israel

www.ghgprotocol.org/mitigation-accounting

Thank You.

Kelly Levin David Rich Pankaj Bhatia

Michael Lazarus

Senior Scientist, Stockholm Environment Institute – US Center

Piloting the Standards

Michael Lazarus, SEI-US, Seattle office

GHG Protocol Standards Launch

WRI, Washington, DCNovember 21, 2014

Piloting the Goals Standard for Seattle

• Goals: Emissions 7% below from 1990 levels by 2012 (Kyoto) and

80% by 2050 (helped launch a national effort of 1,000 U.S. Mayors)

• Finding: 2012 core emissions only 4% below 1990, short of 7% goal,

while population grew by 23%

• Application: Together with ex ante analysis of how to meet 2050

goal, used by City to inform climate action plan

Common process and accounting can help guide

how (and why) goals are set (and met)

1.12

0.23 0.05

0.26 0.25

0.23 0.08 0.05

0.38 0.09 0.05

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

1990 Populationand economic

growth

Phase-in ofODS

substitutes

Lowerpassenger

travel

More efficientcars and

trucks

More efficientair travel

Buildingefficiency &fuel switch

Efficiency &changes in

output

Less disposal,more recycling/ composting

Lower-carbonelectricity

Seattle CityLight offsets

Other 2012

GHGEmissions(Million t CO2e)

TRANSPORT BUILDINGS INDUSTRY & WASTE

6.13 6.04

EXOGENOUS FACTORS POWER SUPPLY OTHER

Piloting Policies & Actions Standard for Keystone XL

• Demonstrated utility of the Standard for infrastructure activities and

policies that might increase emissions

• Highlighted importance of capturing baseline uncertainty

• Showed value of thinking through causal chains

Guidance, tools, and consistency can support

robust, policy-relevant analysis

Sophie Siemens

Project Coordinator, Ministry of Environment, Chile

Pilot Testing Experience from Chile of WRI Mitigation Goals and Policy & Action Standards

MRV of Policies and Low-Emission Development Strategies

Friday, 21st November 2014, by M. Sophie Siemens

LECB Project Coordinator at Climate Change Office

Ministry of Environment of Chile

Gobierno de Chile | Ministerio del Medio Ambiente

“Chile will take NAMAs to achieve a 20% deviation below the ‘business as usual’ emissions growth trajectory by 2020, as projected from year 2007.

32

Goal level

Single or multi yeargoal

Goal period

Mitigation goal type

GHGs considered

Scope

Sector and sources

Geographic boundary National.

All IPCC 2006 sectors and relevant sources by sector.

Single goal across scope with direct emissions.

All KP gases.

Reduction in emissions relative to a static baselinescenario.

From 2007 until 2020.

Single year. Target year: 2020.

20% deviation below the ‘business as usual’ emissions growth trajectory by 2020, as projected from year 2007.

Chile is developing NAMAs to meet its voluntary goal.

Mitigation Goal Assessment

Gobierno de Chile | Ministerio del Medio Ambiente

Minimum Efficiency Performance Standards for residential lighting (MEPS)

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Net

GH

G E

mis

sio

ns (

tCO

2e)

Accumulated effects:-1.729.732 tCO2e

N° Sector Name of Action Implementor Type1 Transport CO2 goals for new cars MoE Ex ante

2 Industry andMining

Cogeneration MoE Ex ante

3 CPR Thermal reconditioning MoE Ex ante &Expost

4 Appliances Minimum Efficiency PerformanceStandards for residential lighting(MEPS)

Ministry ofEnergy

Ex-ante2014-2020

5 All sectors EE awareness campaign MoE tbd

Thank you!

M. Sophie Siemens

msiemens@mma.gob.cl

Questions and Answers

For more information on the Mitigation Goal and Policy and Action standards, please visit ghgprotocol.org

Katia Simeonova

Manager, Mitigation, Data and Analysis Programme, United Nations Climate Change Secretariat

Panel Discussion

Jennifer Morgan, Director, Climate Program, World Resources Institute

Alexa Kleysteuber, Mitigation Advisor, The Independent Association of Latin America and the Caribbean

Maurice LeFranc, Senior Advisor for International Climate Change, United States Environmental Protection Agency

Kelly Levin, Senior Associate, World Resources Institute

David Rich, Senior Associate, World Resources Institute

Questions and Answers

For more information on the Mitigation Goal and Policy and Action standards, please visit ghgprotocol.org