1. Small Scale Projects – Learning from the CDM Paul Soffe

2. Small-scale Facility Concept
A dedicated facility providing buyers with CERs from small-scale projects
Facility participants structure their requirements, specifying:
Project type / Countries / Fixed price
Current buy orders from Government of Austria and Japan Carbon Finance
EcoSecurities sources all projects
Direct sourcing + global network
eg. E+Co joint venture (2E Carbon Access)
EcoSecurities prepares all project documentation
PDD, M&V plan etc.
Arranges validation with a DOE
Coordinates and oversees monitoring, verification and issuance
All project developer costs are covered by the facility
PDD, Validation, Registration
Only cost to developer is verification and annual Share of Proceeds after CERs are produced
Track-record – Small-scale Facility has registered 5 projects under CDM. One has issued CERs.
Sunday, February 17, 2019

3. Buyer – Govt of Austria and JCF
Facility Structure
Project #1
Master ERPA
Buyer – Govt of Austria and JCF
EcoSecurities
Project #2
Project #3
Project #4
Individual ERPAs
Project #5
Sunday, February 17, 2019

4. Key issues for SSc Project Success under carbon mechanisms
Minimise costs – all costs related with CDM project development, including third party costs for validation and registration have to be minimised
Simplicity - all documentation standardized
Speed – entire process process cannot be too long, SSc developers have limited budgets (time and cost)
Expertise – SSc need access to assistance with process
Financial value-added – prices for ERUs (CERs) for smallest project may need to be higher
Track-record – Demonstrating that JI SSc can work with the rapid approval and development of the first projects is very important
Sunday, February 17, 2019

5. Advantages for Buyers
Small-scale projects with high sustainable development benefits;
High-quality projects that have received business development services, thorough due diligence and assistance reaching financial closure – more likely to reach CER delivery targets;
Projects that have advanced through the CDM Development Process – PDD completed, validated, or registered;
Low transaction costs and high efficiency; and
Optimum equilibrium between high quality project assessment and low transaction costs.
Track-record: Small-scale Facility has registered 5 projects and 2 pending. One has received CERs.
Sunday, February 17, 2019

6. Case Study: La Esperanza Hydroelectric Project
Location: Western Honduras
Project type: Hydroelectric
Installed Capacity: MW
CO2e per year: 37,031 tons
CER buyer: World Bank
Current Status: Issued CERs
Lessons learned:
Partnerships
Engage with DNA early in the process
Additionality: include early
Start Early
Sunday, February 17, 2019

7. Case Study: Pig projects in the Philippines
Case Study: Small-scale pig projects
Location: Philippines
Project type: Anaerobic Digestion
Installed Capacity: kW each
CO2e per year: 1,500 to 10,000 tons
CER buyer: Austria, JCF, and EcoSecurities
Current Status: Final validation
Lessons learned:
Difficult to keep transaction costs low
Economies of scale possible over time
Methodologies + data availability
Validation costs high
Sunday, February 17, 2019

8. Case Study: Hydro in Honduras
Case Study: Cuyamapa Hydroelectric Project
Location: Western Honduras
Project type: Hydroelectric
Installed Capacity: MW
CO2e per year: ,552 tons
CER buyer: EcoSecurities through Austrian Facility
Current Status: st Registered Unilateral Project
Lessons learned:
Engage with DNA early in the process
Unilateral Project
Sunday, February 17, 2019

9. Lessons Learned
Bundles of SSc projects an attractive option for buyers to secure a number of projects
Under CDM rules it was possible to develop a large pipeline of projects for the Facilities
Uncertain what problems may be encountered during moniotirng, certification, and issuance stages
Other problems unrelated to CDM Executive Board
price expectations and forecast for CERs
host country approval can take a long time
Sunday, February 17, 2019

10. Conclusions
Make system for SSc projects as simple as possible to reduce transaction costs associated with carbon related aspects of project development
Any charges for by JISC must be kept low
Specify as much of JI cycle in detail ASAP. Clarity is important in building confidence that JI is workable
Do not re-invent the wheel
Utilise CDM baseline meths & additionality tools of SSc
Are any specific meths needed for JI SSc in addition to CDM meths (I do not know). If so develop them – SSc developers will not and cannot (they are by default relatively poor)
Sunday, February 17, 2019