Could have knocked me over with an eagle feather. Not that the Chinese figured out how to take advantage of carbon trading, but that the UN would actually suspend industrial wind projects while it considers the situation. CNN reports in United Nations has placed several Chinese wind projects on hold.
We talked about the China carbon trade strategy a month ago when we referenced this article at agmetalminer.com: “Europe Pays for China’s Wind Farms”
But let’s take a look at CNN’s article: “UN halts funds to China wind farms” and watch the three card Monte that is industrial wind play out one more time:
(FT) — The United Nations body in charge of managing carbon trading has suspended approvals for dozens of Chinese wind farms amid questions over the country’s use of industrial policy to obtain money under the scheme.
China has been by far the biggest beneficiary of the so-called Clean Development Mechanism, a carbon trading system designed to direct funds from wealthy countries to developing nations to cut greenhouse gases.
China has earned 153m carbon credits, worth more than $1bn and making up almost half of the total issued under the UN-run programme in the past five years, according to a Financial Times analysis. The credits are currently trading at about $10-$15 each.
Industrial countries can meet part of their commitments under the 1997 Kyoto protocol to battle global warming by financing projects that mitigate emissions in developing nations. Projects only qualify for credits if the applicants prove they would not have been built anyway, a condition known as “additionality”.
The controversy over Chinese wind farms and other CDM projects will intensify calls for the system to be overhauled at the UN’s Copenhagen conference, which opens on Monday.
China-based consultants said the CDM’s board in Bonn began refusing approval for Chinese wind power projects in the middle of 2009, over concerns Beijing had deliberately lowered subsidies to make them eligible for funding.
“The board now suddenly says the projects are not additional, whereas in the past they found no fault with additionality,” said Yang Zhiliang, general manager of Accord Global Environment Technology, one of China’s leading CDM consultants. “They are blaming the Chinese government and its decision to lower subsidies.”
Ms Yang said Beijing had other aims, such as limiting overcapacity in the wind turbine sector, in setting subsidies. “The Chinese government wouldn’t adjust subsidies just to bag CDM money,” she said.
Industry officials said the CDM board had refused approval for about 50 wind power projects. Doubts over whether CDM funding will be available in the future has also prompted power companies to stall new wind power investments.
Lex de Jonge, head of the UN board, confirmed that “a handful of [Chinese] projects” had been suspended but declined to give reasons. Michael Wara, of Stanford University, said there were considerable problems in China with the CDM’s rules.
With the emphasis that Beijing is now placing on both smaller hydro-electric projects and wind power, the government would have supported at least some of the projects receiving money under the CDM scheme anyway.
“It is hard to believe that there is additionality in many of the energy projects in China right now,” he said.
Chinese government officials quoted in the local media defended the CDM process as an effective mechanism for helping developed countries cut emissions and the only one that gave poorer nations a role.
Chen Hongbo, of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, said although the system needed reform, it should be maintained. “I think that after 2012 [when Kyoto expires], the CDM cannot stop immediately,” he said.
© The Financial Times Limited 2009