Studie stellt Wirksamkeit von Joint Implementation in Frage Ereignis

Das Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) hat die Wirksamkeit des Joint Implementation-Mechanismus der UN-Rahmenkonvention zur Bekämpfung des Klimawandels untersucht und ist zu dem Ergebnis gekommen, dass das Instrument zu 600 Millionen Tonnen CO₂ Mehremissionen geführt habe, anstatt zur Reduzierung von Treibhausgasen beizutragen. Zustande gekommen sei dieser negative Effekt durch mangelndes Monitoring des Instruments sowie die Zulassung von Projekten mit fragwürdiger oder sehr geringer Umweltwirksamkeit. Die Studie des Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) untersucht nach dem Zufallsprinzip 60 JI-Projekte. In 73 Prozent der Fälle war eine wichtige Voraussetzung für die Anerkennung der Projekte, nämlich die Zusätzlichkeit, nicht plausibel. Es zeigt sich, dass Firmen ihre Treibhausgas-Emissionen zunächst künstlich in die Höhe getrieben haben, um im Anschluss an den enormen Emissions-Einsparungen zu verdienen. Die Studie wurde am 24. August 2015 unter dem Titel "Perverse effects of carbon markets on HFC-23 and SF6 abatement projects in Russia" in dem in der wissenschaftliche Fachzeitschrift "Nature Climate Change" veröffentlicht.

The first in-depth review of JI’s environmental integrity shows about three-quarters of credits may not represent actual emission reductions, and their use to meet mitigation targets may have increased emissions by about 600 million tonnes. As of March 2015, almost 872 million ERUs had been issued under JI. But while JI is meant to support climate change mitigation by making it more cost-effective, a new SEI study shows that it seriously undermined global climate action. In a random sample of 60 JI projects, 73% of the offsets came from projects for which additionality was not plausible – that is, the projects would likely have proceeded even without carbon revenues. The study also examined the six largest project types across JI, and found only one, N2O abatement from nitric acid production, had overall high environmental integrity – meaning the projects were likely to be truly additional and not overcredited. Altogether, the study found that about 80% of ERUs issued came from project types of low or questionable environmental integrity. The design of JI is meant to safeguard against non-additional projects: Host countries must cancel one of their emission allowances for every ERU issued. But the study found more than 95% of ERUs were issued by countries with significant surpluses of allowances. If those countries issued non-additional ERUs, they would not have to make up the difference by further reducing emissions at home. Thus, ERUs worth about 600 Mt CO2e issued as of March 2015 may not represent actual emission reductions. The study was published on 24 August in "Nature Climate Change".