ICAO 2013 Environmental Report - page 144

icao environmental report
2013
A global mandatory offsetting scheme:
could be less
complex since existing emissions units can be used and
tracked through a simple registry.
A global mandatory offsetting scheme complemented
by a revenue generation mechanism:
could be more
complex due to the need to determine how revenues will
be collected and used.
A global emissions trading scheme:
could increase
complexity and have higher upfront costs due to the need to
administer specific aviation allowances (however, it should
offer more flexibility for participants due to the creation of
emissions units, which can be traded in the marketplace).
Conclusion
Overall, the results of the qualitative and quantitative
assessments of the three options for a global MBM scheme
demonstrated that they were technically feasible and have
the capacity to contribute to achieving ICAO’s environmental
goals. (See
Box
on Council - 197
th
Session - Sixth meeting,
9 November 2012).
Compliance obligations could generally be tracked
through a registry, which at a minimum, would record the
environmental objective of a scheme, emissions of each
participant, obligation of each participant to surrender
emissions units, and tracking of emissions units to ensure
that participant obligations are met. A robust monitoring,
reporting and verification (MRV) system is key to any MBM,
as it ensures that one unit of emissions emitted and recorded
in one jurisdiction is directly comparable to a unit in another
jurisdiction. This also protects fair market competition and
avoids market distortion.
Three main differences in the design features of the three
options for a global MBM scheme (global mandatory
offsetting, global mandatory offsetting with revenue and
global emissions trading) were identified as follows:
1. use of different emissions units;
2. differences in the allocation of obligations to individual
participants; and
3. different accounting requirements to ensure compliance
under the two systems.
These design differences were assessed for the complexity
of administrative steps that would likely be involved in
implementing the three options, as follows:
chapter 4
global emissions
144
References
1
CAEP/5 Working paper:
Economic Analysis of
Potential Market-based Options for Reduction of
CO
2
Emissions from Aviation
(CAEP/5-WP/24).
2
ICAO Assembly Resolution A37-19:
Consolidated
statement of continuing ICAO policies and practices
related to environmental protection—Climate change
,
).
3
International Energy Agency,
World Energy
Outlook 2011
. To be consistent with modeling
data, 2010 dollars were converted to 2006 dollars.
4
International Energy Agency,
World Energy
Outlook 2011
. To be consistent with modeling data,
2010 USD were converted to 2006 USD. Fuel prices
were converted to annual prices until the year 2036.
COUNCIL − 197
TH
SESSION − SIXTH MEETING
(9 NOVEMBER 2012)
COUNCIL DECISION − C-DEC 197/6
“…recognized that the results of the qualitative and
quantitative analysis of the three options for a global
MBM scheme evaluated by the Secretariat with the
support of the Experts demonstrated that all three
options were technically feasible and had the capacity
to contribute to achieving ICAO's environmental goals...”
1...,134,135,136,137,138,139,140,141,142,143 145,146,147,148,149,150,151,152,153,154,...212
Powered by FlippingBook