Comments on: The Global CDM Hydro Hall of Shame

By: Zachary Shahan

Zachary Shahan — Fri, 24 Feb 2012 01:14:00 +0000

Nice point. That’s one I will certainly keep in mind when writing about this topic.

By: Erich Jacoby-Hawkins

Erich Jacoby-Hawkins — Tue, 21 Feb 2012 23:23:00 +0000

What’s ironic is that CDM was included in Kyoto under pressure from industries or countries that were resistant to making reductions themselves. Then the failures of CDM are used to discredit Kyoto by the climate-skeptics backed by those same industries!

By: Erich Jacoby-Hawkins

Erich Jacoby-Hawkins — Tue, 21 Feb 2012 23:22:00 +0000

What’s ironic is that

By: Katy Yan

Katy Yan — Tue, 21 Feb 2012 19:13:00 +0000

Thanks Bob for your question, and yes, Zachary’s right. Essentially what I mean is that a lot of CDM credits are going to hydropower projects that would have happened anyway without access to the CDM. This means no additional emissions reductions are actually occurring, because wealthy countries have avoided reducing their own emission buy buying offsets that are fictitious.

Hydropower represents the dominate project type in the CDM pipeline (at 26% as of Dec 2011). Most of the CDM recipients are from China, India and Brazil, which all have thriving hydropower industries with a lot of political and financial support already. This means that smaller projects, like disseminating cookstoves in Sudan, are being left out even though they actually do depend on such financing mechanisms to be economically viable.

By: Zachary Shahan

Zachary Shahan — Tue, 21 Feb 2012 00:28:00 +0000

I think she means the money is going to projects that should not qualify, thus is not going to projects that could offset emissions. But will make sure she sees your question.

By: Bob_Wallace

Bob_Wallace — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 19:36:00 +0000

” it’s provided massive subsidies to hydropower developers while increasing greenhouse gas emissions”

What do you mean by this statement?