Sergey Kuraev and Alexander Golub, Environmental Defense, outlined the Environmental Defense project and its aims, which are, inter alia, to develop methodological guidelines for the development of Joint Implementation (JI) bioenergy projects in the Russian Federation and facilitate carbon investments in bioenergy projects.

Vladimir Savin, Novgorod Region Administration, described Novgorod, the region in which the project is being undertaken, emphasizing it as the Russian pioneer in conducting a greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory. He emphasized the need to utilize biofuel, given that the territory has a large amount of unutilized timber waste. He expanded on the pilot project, which aims to utilize more timber as fuel in a boiler. He highlighted the goal of duplicating the project across hundreds of boilers, and said the resulting reduction in carbon dioxide and urban air pollution would be substantial.

Alexey Kokorin, WWF, outlined the work of WWF with Environmental Defense in the Russian Federation, including on biomass, emphasizing a reforestation projects as one of their main foci.

In response to questions from participants, Savin said transportation is the key influence on cost and replicating the pilot project will present significant challenges. Noting the uncertainty of future fuel and carbon allowance prices, Kokorin explained that the break-even price for Environmental Defense’s pilot project was likely to be relatively low, especially when considering the savings from fuel, and emphasized the need to package small-scale projects to save on transaction costs.

Jürgen Salav, European Commission, said the side event overviewed of European Union (EU) activities to promote the clean development mechanism (CDM) and Joint Implementation (JI).

Bettina Wunder, Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management, Austria, outlined the Austrian JI/CDM programme, highlighting CDM initiatives in Africa, which include a memorandum of understanding to be signed with South Africa and a task force in Africa.

Peter Wittoeck, Belgium Federal JI/CDM Programmes, explained the Belgium JI/CDM initiative, which has a budget of 10 million euros for the first tender and 22 million euros for the second. He said the programme favors projects on renewable energy and energy efficiency, excluding nuclear energy and LULUCF.

Jakob Forman, Danish Environmental Protection Agency, stressed that the purchase programme is an important component of Danish compliance efforts, and said its results include nine million tons of carbon reduction, and projects on biomass, wind power, and nitrous dioxide reductions from the fertilizer industry.

Malin Ahlberg, German Emissions Trading Authority, said Germany will fulfill its target through domestic measures and has no purchase programme. He underscored activities aimed at: developing bilateral projects in Romania, Ukraine and the Russian Federation; participating in carbon funds; and fostering an information exchange network.

Anja Wucke, GTZ, highlighted ongoing capacity-building activities in Tunisia and India, noting their focus on sector-specific workshops, legal aspects of JI/CDM, baseline data availability, and methodology development, especially in small African countries.

Karoliina Anttonen, Finish Environment Institute, noted that JI/CDM credits are part of the Finish compliance efforts, and highlighted current projects in Honduras, China and Estonia. She said that such initiatives offer host countries access to a network of experts and financing institutions, freedom from many transaction costs, and support during project cycles.

Gerie Jonk, Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, the Netherlands, explained the Dutch JI/CDM purchase programme, which promotes capacity building initiatives and private sector participation. She highlighted that the programme includes 175 CDM projects in 25 countries and that the Netherlands is still buying credits, since its target is yet to be reached.

Rebecca Sainz, Spanish Climate Change Bureau, highlighted the establishment of the Iberoamerican Climate Change Network that includes 21 countries, especially in the Latin America and Caribbean region, and noted projects focused on renewable energy, energy efficiency and waste management.

Anthony Pearce, Swedish Energy Agency, noted that Sweden does not intend to use JI/CDM credits to fulfill its commitment, but said Sweden is taking part in such programmes to gain experience and contribute to sustainable development in host countries.

Martin Hession, Global Carbon Markets, UK, said the UK is not using JI/CDM credits to fulfill its national target. He noted that the UK CDM project approval procedure is simple, and highlighted the UK voluntary market outside the EU and Kyoto mechanisms.

Amb. Adrian Macey, New Zealand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, said the side event sought to strengthen international cooperation.

Harry Clark, AgResearch Limited, New Zealand, emphasized the challenges of estimating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions due to, e.g., their geographic and temporal variability. He discussed the mitigation challenges, saying that: options are limited with regard to free grazing ruminants; solutions must be low cost; and industry engagement is crucial. He introduced New Zealand’s “Pastoral Greenhouse Gas Research Consortium,” an industry-government partnership, and underscored the importance of inter-country collaboration and the challenge of aligning mitigation and quantification.

Tommy Boland, University College Dublin, Ireland, discussed the Irish situation with regard to methane emissions in ruminants, and outlined the options available for decreasing emissions, including: increasing animal productivity; decreasing the quantity of animals; selecting animals for improved efficiency; introducing fermentation modifiers; and changing the animals’ diets. He highlighted the efficacy of reducing the age of slaughter.

Roberto Rubio, Universidad Nacional del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos Aires, Argentina, said that a promising mitigation option was to improve the efficiency of the system, including through nutrition, pasture quality, the grazing system, animal health and herd management. He outlined a project underway in Argentina that seeks to improve knowledge and systematize data.

Dave Chadwick, Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research, UK, emphasized the difficulty of matching activity data with emission factors and the need to: move towards “smarter inventories;” ensure all sources are included in estimates; link and harmonize inventories; develop robust emission factors; and gear methane detection methodologies towards specific sources. On nitrous oxide emissions, he discussed several databases being built and noted the efficacy of moving slurry applications from autumn to spring.

William Hohenstein, US Department of Agriculture, discussed US activities with regard to agriculture and climate change. He gave an overview of agricultural conservation programs, saying that, as of 2003, these programmes included GHGs as a consideration. He discussed the USDA’s GHG reporting guidelines for forestry and agriculture, and underscored that voluntary markets in the US, and the resulting interest in agriculture as a low-cost source of GHG emission reductions, were driving an interest in quantifying agricultural greenhouse gas emissions.

In the ensuing debate, participants discussed, inter alia, the cost-effectiveness of some mitigation measures when considering co-benefits, measurement techniques and international collaboration.

Lars Müller, EC, presented the study organized by the EU on the impacts of climate change in Europe for 2011-2040 and 2071-2100, exploring the costs of such impacts and the policy responses needed. He highlighted a research consortium that was organized to look at various aspects of such impacts.

Juan Carlos Ciscar, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS), explained that the Projection of Economic Impacts of Climate Change in EU Sectors based on Bottom-up Analysis (PESETA) is a Joint Research Centre (JRC) project that was established to respond to an EU request to analyze costs and benefits of EU post-2012 climate policy. He said that PESETA involves many partners, with varying expertise, and from different sectors, including agriculture, human health, river basin flooding, energy demand, and tourism sectors. He underscored that the project aims to develop monetary estimates of the impacts of climate change in Europe, which will potentially be useful for policy makers. He said possible research needs include: further adaptation assessments; dynamic land use scenarios; treatment of the cascade of uncertainty in a systematic way; and integration of other sectors, such as water.

Luc Feyen, EC JRC, overviewed sectorial studies on river floods, and said floods are the most common disaster in Europe and there is a perception that flood frequency and their implied damages have increased. He explained that increased flooding had several causes, including economic, social, terrestrial, climatic and atmospheric systems. He underscored that existing research has not yet demonstrated a clear link between climate change and increased flood frequency. He said flood risk is composed of susceptibility to hazards and the magnitude of flood events. He noted future flood hazard assessment under the IPCC Fourth Report and explained that JRC is currently conducting a pan-European study on flood risk and climate change, noting the ongoing effort to assess flood risk at an European scale.