Cookstove Carbon Credits: Recipe For Cooking The Climate Books
A new report, 'Recipe for Greenwashing', commissioned by Korean NGO Plan 1.5 and co-authored by Carbon Market Watch and Director of the Berkeley Carbon Trading Project Barbara Haya, has revealed that the climate credentials of the Korean Emissions Trading Scheme (K-ETS) risk being significantly undermined by its inclusion of international carbon credits.
The report analyses a sample of 21 clean cookstove projects that have supplied South Korean companies with carbon credits for use under the K-ETS, finding that on average they are likely generating 18.3 times more credits than they should.
The analysis finds that the 9.7 million credits (representing 9.7 million tonnes of emissions reductions) likely have a climate impact of only approximately half a million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (531,979 tCO2e), the equivalent of 18 times more credits than are justified.
Cookstove projects constitute the majority of international credits used by companies complying with the K-ETS. Companies under the K-ETS are entitled to match their emission reduction obligations with the purchase of international credits, as long as they exceed no more than 5% of the company's compliance obligation.
Break the mould
The analysis highlights that reliance on international credits undermines the effectiveness and credibility of the K-ETS. It mirrors the now-abandoned practice in the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), where such credits led to an inflation in supply, price crashes, and delayed domestic decarbonisation.
While the EU has banned international credits from its ETS since 2021, the Korean government appears to be taking the opposite approach. Alarmingly, the government is considering raising the limit from 5% of a company's emissions threshold to 10% in the fourth period of the K-ETS (2026-2030). Doubling the share of an already problematic decision will likely have detrimental consequences for the environmental integrity of the policy.
The South Korean government also plans to use international credits to reach its United Nations climate target for 2030 by including 37.5 million international credits into its nationally determined contributions.
The projects analysed in the report use methodologies AMS-I.E and AMS-II.G to generate carbon credits. Generally, the number of credits a carbon credit project issues under these two methodologies is determined by a number of factors, including actual stove usage, drop-outs, fuel consumption patterns, and many more.
Research, as well as a decision by the Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market (ICVCM) in March, has determined that both methodologies lead to over-crediting because these methodologies rely on outdated assumptions that allow a high, and inflated, volume of credits to be generated. Both methodologies were rejected from attaining the ICVCM's Core Carbon Principles label.
The wrong path
The report calls on the South Korean government to ban international credits from use under the K-ETS, strengthen caps and focus on domestic emissions reductions.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
10 hours ago
- Scoop
New Voluntary Nature Credits Market Must Have Integrity
Press Release – Forest And Bird Forest & Birds fear is that international and domestic investors including developers, oil, mining, and primary industry interests will engage in this market to cover up damage being caused to New Zealands vulnerable ecosystems and wildlife. Forest & Bird cautiously welcomes today's government announcement on the development of a high integrity ' voluntary nature credits market ' in Aotearoa New Zealand. Launched during the national Fieldays at Mystery Creek in Hamilton by Minister Hoggard, the news indicates the direction the Government is taking to establish a voluntary system that matches investors with conservation projects focused on protecting biodiversity and reducing carbon emissions. As participation in this market is completely voluntary, it is separate from compulsory emissions trading systems (ETS) requirements and RMA offset regulations, which are tied to regulatory consenting processes. 'While we see this as a useful step, and it will help support people and organisations who wish to voluntarily invest in biodiversity, we have reservations that it could become a vehicle for offsetting environmental harm,' says Richard Capie, Forest & Bird's, Group Manager, Conservation Advocacy and Policy. Forest & Bird's fear is that international and domestic investors – including developers, oil, mining, and primary industry interests – will engage in this market to cover up damage being caused to New Zealand's vulnerable ecosystems and wildlife. 'We're concerned they will use this market to 'greenwash' their public image,' says Mr Capie. 'We need to ensure that any external biodiversity incentive system has high integrity and is sustainable – that real, enduring outcomes for nature are achieved and it is not used to mask environmental damage. 'This new market should not undermine or replace government investment in nature, and it should bring additional resources to restore and protect our important flora and fauna. Ultimately, New Zealanders rightly expect government to look after our incredible wildlife and wild places and invest accordingly. Forest & Bird will be watching with interest to see how this develops.' The Ministry for the Environment says that the intention of the new system is not to create a platform to offset effects on the environment, instead, the government wants to create a system where individuals or organisations can voluntarily invest in nature. This would come with assurances that their investment adheres to recognised standards developed through this new system. There will be guiding principles in place, one of the key principles being that any project must deliver additional benefits to the environment. Nine pilot projects are already underway, all privately funded. However, the original intention of a voluntary nature credits market (or biodiversity credit system) was to sit alongside and compliment the National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity (NPSIB), so landowners could be appropriately compensated for looking after 'significant natural areas' (SNA's) on their property – supporting on-the-ground conservation, such as reforestation, wetland restoration, or planting native vegetation.
Scoop
11 hours ago
- Scoop
New Voluntary Nature Credits Market Must Have Integrity
Press Release – Forest And Bird Forest & Birds fear is that international and domestic investors including developers, oil, mining, and primary industry interests will engage in this market to cover up damage being caused to New Zealands vulnerable ecosystems and wildlife. Forest & Bird cautiously welcomes today's government announcement on the development of a high integrity ' voluntary nature credits market ' in Aotearoa New Zealand. Launched during the national Fieldays at Mystery Creek in Hamilton by Minister Hoggard, the news indicates the direction the Government is taking to establish a voluntary system that matches investors with conservation projects focused on protecting biodiversity and reducing carbon emissions. As participation in this market is completely voluntary, it is separate from compulsory emissions trading systems (ETS) requirements and RMA offset regulations, which are tied to regulatory consenting processes. 'While we see this as a useful step, and it will help support people and organisations who wish to voluntarily invest in biodiversity, we have reservations that it could become a vehicle for offsetting environmental harm,' says Richard Capie, Forest & Bird's, Group Manager, Conservation Advocacy and Policy. Forest & Bird's fear is that international and domestic investors – including developers, oil, mining, and primary industry interests – will engage in this market to cover up damage being caused to New Zealand's vulnerable ecosystems and wildlife. 'We're concerned they will use this market to 'greenwash' their public image,' says Mr Capie. 'We need to ensure that any external biodiversity incentive system has high integrity and is sustainable – that real, enduring outcomes for nature are achieved and it is not used to mask environmental damage. 'This new market should not undermine or replace government investment in nature, and it should bring additional resources to restore and protect our important flora and fauna. Ultimately, New Zealanders rightly expect government to look after our incredible wildlife and wild places and invest accordingly. Forest & Bird will be watching with interest to see how this develops.' The Ministry for the Environment says that the intention of the new system is not to create a platform to offset effects on the environment, instead, the government wants to create a system where individuals or organisations can voluntarily invest in nature. This would come with assurances that their investment adheres to recognised standards developed through this new system. There will be guiding principles in place, one of the key principles being that any project must deliver additional benefits to the environment. Nine pilot projects are already underway, all privately funded. However, the original intention of a voluntary nature credits market (or biodiversity credit system) was to sit alongside and compliment the National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity (NPSIB), so landowners could be appropriately compensated for looking after 'significant natural areas' (SNA's) on their property – supporting on-the-ground conservation, such as reforestation, wetland restoration, or planting native vegetation.
Scoop
14 hours ago
- Scoop
New Voluntary Nature Credits Market Must Have Integrity
Forest & Bird cautiously welcomes today's government announcement on the development of a high integrity 'voluntary nature credits market' in Aotearoa New Zealand. Launched during the national Fieldays at Mystery Creek in Hamilton by Minister Hoggard, the news indicates the direction the Government is taking to establish a voluntary system that matches investors with conservation projects focused on protecting biodiversity and reducing carbon emissions. As participation in this market is completely voluntary, it is separate from compulsory emissions trading systems (ETS) requirements and RMA offset regulations, which are tied to regulatory consenting processes. 'While we see this as a useful step, and it will help support people and organisations who wish to voluntarily invest in biodiversity, we have reservations that it could become a vehicle for offsetting environmental harm,' says Richard Capie, Forest & Bird's, Group Manager, Conservation Advocacy and Policy. Forest & Bird's fear is that international and domestic investors – including developers, oil, mining, and primary industry interests – will engage in this market to cover up damage being caused to New Zealand's vulnerable ecosystems and wildlife. 'We're concerned they will use this market to 'greenwash' their public image,' says Mr Capie. 'We need to ensure that any external biodiversity incentive system has high integrity and is sustainable – that real, enduring outcomes for nature are achieved and it is not used to mask environmental damage. 'This new market should not undermine or replace government investment in nature, and it should bring additional resources to restore and protect our important flora and fauna. Ultimately, New Zealanders rightly expect government to look after our incredible wildlife and wild places and invest accordingly. Forest & Bird will be watching with interest to see how this develops.' The Ministry for the Environment says that the intention of the new system is not to create a platform to offset effects on the environment, instead, the government wants to create a system where individuals or organisations can voluntarily invest in nature. This would come with assurances that their investment adheres to recognised standards developed through this new system. There will be guiding principles in place, one of the key principles being that any project must deliver additional benefits to the environment. Nine pilot projects are already underway, all privately funded. However, the original intention of a voluntary nature credits market (or biodiversity credit system) was to sit alongside and compliment the National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity (NPSIB), so landowners could be appropriately compensated for looking after 'significant natural areas' (SNA's) on their property – supporting on-the-ground conservation, such as reforestation, wetland restoration, or planting native vegetation.
