FCCC/SBSTA/1997/12/Add.1

Distr.

GENERAL

10 October 1997

ENGLISH ONLY

SUBSIDIARY BODY FOR SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL ADVICE

Seventh session

Bonn, 20 - 29 October 1997

Item 8 of the provisional agenda

Page

I. Table 1: Table of activities implemented jointly under the

pilot phase 2

II. Table 2: National Programmes, criteria in 5/CP.1 6

III. Table 3: National Programmes, additional criteria 8

GE.97-

TABLES

Table 1: Table of activities implemented jointly under the pilot phase

(list updated continuously and made

available in the CC:INFO/AIJ section of the UNFCCC WWW site)

Activity Type	Activity Title	Parties	Lifetime (years)	CO₂^* (metric tons)	Report submission^**
Activity Type	Activity Title	Parties	Lifetime (years)	CO₂^* (metric tons)	1996	1997	1997 late
Afforestation	Project CARFIX: Sustainable Forest Management	Costa Rica, USA	25	21,776,749	x	---	x
Afforestation	RUSAFOR: Saratov Afforestation Project	Russian Federation, USA	40	292,728	x	---	---
Agriculture	Project Salicornia: Halophyte Cultivation in Sonora	Mexico, USA	10	437	---	---	x
Energy efficiency	Adavere District Heating	Estonia, Sweden	10	2,000	---	---	x
Energy efficiency	Aluksne District Heating	Latvia, Sweden	10	30,850	---	x	---
Energy efficiency	Balvi District Heating	Latvia, Sweden	10	40,000	---	x	---
Energy efficiency	Burkina Faso Sustainable Energy Management	Burkina Faso, Norway	6	1,450,000	---	x	---
Energy efficiency	Emission Reduction at Power Plants in Romania	Netherlands, Romania	5	1,092,000	---	x	---
Energy efficiency	Energy-efficiency Improvement by Hungarian Municipalities and Utilities	Hungary, Netherlands	20	240,000	x	x	---
Energy efficiency	High Efficiency Lighting (ILLUMEX)	Norway, Mexico	4.5	531,000	x	---	x
Energy efficiency	Horticulture Project in Tyumen	Russian Federation, Netherlands	---	---	---	x(E)	---
Energy efficiency	Järvakandi District Heating	Estonia, Sweden	10	3,900	---	---	x
Energy efficiency	Jelgava District Heating	Latvia, Sweden	10	4,120	---	x	---
Energy efficiency	Jelgava Energy Efficiency	Latvia, Sweden	10	800	---	x	---
Energy efficiency	Modelling and Optimization of Grid Operation of the Gas Transportation System "Ushgorod Corridor" of Wolgotransgas (Gazprom)	Germany, Russian Federation	---	---	---	---	x
Energy efficiency	Mustamäe - Mustamäe tee, Ehitajate tee, Sütiste tee Energy Efficiency	Estonia, Sweden	10	3,700	---	---	x
Energy efficiency	Mustamäe - Vilde tee Energy Efficiency	Estonia, Sweden	10	3,000	---	---	x
Energy efficiency	Orissare District Heating	Estonia, Sweden	10	8,500	---	---	x
Energy efficiency	Saldus District Heating	Latvia, Sweden	10	3,350	---	x	---
Energy efficiency	Saldus Energy Efficiency	Latvia, Sweden	10	2,100	---	x	---
Energy efficiency	Türi District Heating	Estonia, Sweden	10	9,100	---	---	x
Energy efficiency	Valga District Heating	Estonia, Sweden	10	7,000	---	---	x
Energy efficiency	Vändra District Heating	Estonia, Sweden	10	2,200	---	---	x
Energy efficiency	Vöru District Heating	Estonia, Sweden	10	40,000	---	---	x
Forest preservation	ECOLAND: Piedras Blancas National Park	Costa Rica, USA	16	1,342,733	x	---	x
Forest preservation	Forest Rehabilitation in Krkonose and Sumava National Parks	Czech Republic, Netherlands	15	9,834,120	x(E)	---	x
Forest preservation	Reduced Impact Logging for Carbon Sequestration in East Kalimantan	Indonesia, USA	40	206,800	---	---	x
Forest preservation	Rio Bravo Carbon Sequestration Pilot Project	Belize, USA	40	4,801,478	---	---	x
Forest reforestation	Klinki Forestry Project	Costa Rica, USA	40	7,216,000	x	---	x
Forest reforestation	Reforestation and Forest Conservation	Costa Rica, Norway	25	846,405	---	x	---
Forest reforestation	Scolel Té: Carbon Sequestration and Sustainable Forest Management in Chiapas	Mexico, USA	30	55,000-1,210,000	---	---	x
Forest restoration	Project BIODIVERSIFIX	Costa Rica, USA	51	18,480,000	x	---	x
Fuel switching	Coal to Gas Conversion	Poland, Norway	17	2,408,866	x	x	---
Fuel switching	RABA/IKARUS Compressed Natural Gas Engine Bus Project	Hungary, Netherlands	20	7,400	x	x	---
Fugitive gas capture	RUSAGAS: Fugitive Gas Capture Project	Russian Federation, USA	25	30,000,666	x	---	x
Fugitive gas capture	Sanitary Landfilling with Energy Recovery in the Moscow Region	Russian Federation, Netherlands	---	---	---	x(E)	---
Renewable energy	Aeroenergía S.A. Wind Facility	Costa Rica, USA	20	36,194	x		x
Renewable energy	Aluksne Boiler Conversion	Latvia, Sweden	10	254,000	---	x	---
Renewable energy	Balvi Boiler Conversion	Latvia, Sweden	10	132,000	---	x	---
Renewable energy	Brocenia Boiler Conversion	Latvia, Sweden	10	86,000	---	x	---
Renewable energy	Daugavgriva Boiler Conversion	Latvia, Sweden	10	130,000	---	x	---
Renewable energy	Doña Julia Hydroelectric Project	Costa Rica, USA	15	210,566	x	---	x
Renewable energy	El Hoyo-Monte Galan Geothermal Project	Nicaragua, USA	40	19,765,628	---	---	x
Renewable energy	Haabneme Boiler Conversion	Estonia, Sweden	10	124,000	---	---	x
Renewable energy	Janmuiza Boiler Conversion	Latvia, Sweden	10	38,000	---	x	---
Renewable energy	Jekabplis Boiler Conversion	Latvia, Sweden	10	24,000	---	x	---
Renewable energy	Jurmala Boiler Conversion	Latvia, Sweden	10	94,000	---	x	---
Renewable energy	Narva Jöesuu Boiler Conversion	Estonia, Sweden	10	8,100	---	---	x
Renewable energy	Paldiski Boiler Conversion	Estonia, Sweden	10	81,000	---	---	x
Renewable energy	Plantas Eólicas S.A. Wind Facility	Costa Rica, USA	21	222,538	x	---	x
Renewable energy	Rauna Boiler Conversion	Latvia, Sweden	10	24,000	---	x	---
Renewable energy	Slampe Boiler Conversion	Latvia, Sweden	10	39,000	---	x	---
Renewable energy	Solar-Based Rural Electrification in Honduras	Honduras, USA	24	17,192	---	---	x
Renewable energy	Tartu-Aardla Boiler Conversion	Estonia, Sweden	10	98,000	---	---	x
Renewable energy	Tierras Morenas Windfarm Project	Costa Rica, USA	13	118,611	x	---	x
Renewable energy	Ugale Boiler Conversion	Latvia, Sweden	10	44,000	---	x	---
Renewable energy	Valga Boiler Conversion	Estonia, Sweden	10	64,000	---	---	x
Renewable energy	Valka Boiler Conversion	Latvia, Sweden	10	30,000	---	x	---
Renewable energy	Viesite Boiler Conversion	Latvia, Sweden	10	24,000	---	x	---
Renewable energy	Viljandi Boiler Conversion	Estonia, Sweden	10	98,000	---	---	x
Renewable energy	Vöru Boiler Conversion	Estonia, Sweden	10	114,000	---	---	x
Renewable energy	Wind Power Plant	Germany, Latvia	10	12,579	---	x	---

^* This column shows the estimated reduced emissions measured in metric tonnes of CO₂ equivalents.

^** In this column "x" indicates that a report has been submitted and "x(E") indicates that only the endorsement by Parties involved has been received in the respective year.

Table 2: National Programmes, criteria in 5/CP.1

Criterion

____

Country
AIJ should be compatible with, and supportive, of national environment and development priorities and strategies

AIJ should contribute to cost-effectiveness in achieving global benefits

AIJ require prior acceptance, endorsement, or approval by the Governments of the Parties participating in these activities

Australia (*)

host country government must accept project as being consistent with national priorities

yes

yes

Canada (*)

yes

yes

Costa Rica

yes

yes

yes

Germany

yes

yes

yes

Japan

be adequately assessed and reviewed

yes

yes

Mexico

yes

yes

yes

Netherlands (*)

must be compatible with, and supportive, of national environment and development priorities

yes, for forestry projects

yes

Norway

yes

yes

yes

Poland

yes

yes

yes

Sweden

yes

yes (profit generation, competitive procurement procedures )

yes

Switzerland

yes

yes

yes

United States

yes

yes

yes

(*) No new information has been submitted for this table. The last information was provided in 1996.

Table 2: National Programmes, criteria in 5/CP.1 (cont.)

Project criterion

___

Country
AIJ should bring about real, measurable, and long-term environmental benefits related to the mitigation of climate change that would not have occurred in the absence of such activities

Financing of AIJ shall be additional to financial obligations of Annex II Parties within the framework of the financial mechanism and regular ODA flows

No credits shall accrue to any Party as a result of greenhouse gases reduced or sequestered during the pilot phase

Australia (*)

project should involve specific measures to reduce net GHGs initiated as a result of AIJ

must be additional to ODA and other sources under UNFCCC

yes

Canada (*)

activities must result in measurable reductions of net GHG emissions

activities should be financed outside existing ODA

no emission reduction credits can be claimed by the country of an investing entity against its domestic stabilization commitment to the year 2000

Costa Rica

yes

yes

yes

Germany

yes

yes

yes

Japan

Yes, taking into consideration all leakage effects

additional to financial obligations under Art. 4.3 as well as current ODA flows

yes

Mexico

yes

yes

yes

Netherlands (*)

minimum annual sequestration requirements for forests

additional to GEF as well as current ODA

will not use AIJ for its present commitments under the FCCC

Norway

yes

additional to GEF as well as ODA

there are no credits to be accrued during the pilot phase and private sector is not granted exemptions or refunds of the Norwegian CO₂ tax or other national policies for participating in AIJ pilot phase activities

Poland

yes

yes

yes

Sweden

yes

yes

yes

Switzerland

yes

yes

yes

United States

yes

must be additional to: GEF, multilateral development bank, ODA, or in excess of U.S. federal funding level in 1993

yes

(*) No new information has been submitted for this table. The last information was provided in 1996.

Table 3: National Programmes, additional criteria

Project criterion

___

Country
Project was initiated specifically for AIJ purposes

Emission reductions are required to be verifiable, including baseline calculations

Emissions monitoring programme required

Australia (*)

project should involve specific measures initiated as a result of AIJ

yes

a high degree of transparency should exist

Canada (*)

measurable reductions required

Costa Rica

considers AIJ proposals

proposals should contain already detailed analysis (defensible reference or baseline case), provisions for independent verification be included in project

yes, in order to establish a high degree of certainty

Germany

actual and measurable benefits required

Japan

yes

yes

Mexico

yes

yes

yes

Netherlands (*)

projects should be economically sound and would not have been set up without additional AIJ funding

yes

yes

Norway

the scope of the project must be enlarged due to AIJ investments

yes

detailed programme for each reported project

Poland

projects involving technological development and upgrading of equipment, or involving financial resources to procure such technologies and equipment; or projects directly reducing the generation of GHGs in the production of goods and services

it must be possible to estimate ex ante the expected reductions in GHG emissions and monitor ex post the actual reductions in GHG emissions

yes

Sweden

Switzerland

can be easily monitored and verified (e.g., focus on projects that result in significant CO₂ reductions; no sink enhancement projects)

United States

technology or practice must not have been introduced in the region without AIJ, if not, only incremental reductions are counted

verification plan and independent third-party replicability required

monitoring plan required

(*) No new information has been submitted for this table. The last information was provided in 1996.

Table 3: National Programmes, additional criteria (cont.)

Project criterion

____

Country
Emission reductions are required to be sustainable

Periodic reassessment of emission reduction estimates

Analysis of other environmental impacts required

Analysis of social impacts required

Australia (*)

explicit requirement

need to account for impacts

need to account for impacts

Canada (*)

Costa Rica

durability/quality required

yes

Germany

lasting benefits required

Japan

yes, by project implementation entities

to be adequately assessed and reviewed

to be adequately assessed and reviewed

Mexico

sufficient guarantees required

annual progress reports used as feedback tool

yes

yes

Netherlands (*)

yes

addressed through monitoring programme

projects should lead to clear beneficial local environmental impacts

project must contribute to the socio-economic position of the local population

Norway

yes

addressed through monitoring programme

analysis provided for each reported project

Poland

yes

yes

activities should not lead to negatif developments of other local/regional environmental quality indicators as a result of achieving reductions in GHG emissions

Sweden

Switzerland

United States

yes

explicit requirement

impacts should be identified

impacts are considered

(*) No new information has been submitted for this table. The last information was provided in 1996.

Table 3: National Programmes, additional criteria (cont.)

Project criterion

____

Country
Project must be consistent with sustainable development principles

Project should include a training component in host country

Institutional arrangements in host country

special focus in the pilot phase

Australia (*)

yes

Canada (*)

Costa Rica

yes

to the extent local entities could adequately implement and administer projects

development of financial mechanisms to direct the AIJ projects, and marketing

Germany

main emphasis on emission reductions, sinks are not excluded.

Japan

Mexico

yes

need to represent an advance in the country's technical capacity

Netherlands (*)

projects require sustainable forestry and energy policies

yes

Norway

viewed to be an asset but not a criterion per se

Poland

be sensitive to, and compatible with, macroeconomic policies at national and 'voivodeship' levels

projects which include only technical assistance, education, or training are valuable forms of foreign assistance but they will not be considered as JI projects.

encourage the economic use of natural resource and re-use or recycling of waste materials, and be compatible with, and promote, to the greatest extent possible, the utilization of modern production processes

Sweden

small projects allowing for quick implementation

Switzerland

energy production and end-use (e.g., fuel-switching to low- or no-carbon fuels, renewable energies, enhanced energy-efficiency)

United States

(*) No new information has been submitted for this table. The last information was provided in 1996.

- - - - -

Criterion ____ Country	AIJ should be compatible with, and supportive, of national environment and development priorities and strategies	AIJ should contribute to cost-effectiveness in achieving global benefits	AIJ require prior acceptance, endorsement, or approval by the Governments of the Parties participating in these activities
*Australia ()**	host country government must accept project as being consistent with national priorities	yes	yes
*Canada ()**		yes	yes
Costa Rica	yes	yes	yes
Germany	yes	yes	yes
Japan	be adequately assessed and reviewed	yes	yes
Mexico	yes	yes	yes
*Netherlands ()**	must be compatible with, and supportive, of national environment and development priorities	yes, for forestry projects	yes
Norway	yes	yes	yes
Poland	yes	yes	yes
Sweden	yes	yes (profit generation, competitive procurement procedures )	yes
Switzerland	yes	yes	yes
United States	yes	yes	yes

Project criterion ___ Country	AIJ should bring about real, measurable, and long-term environmental benefits related to the mitigation of climate change that would not have occurred in the absence of such activities	Financing of AIJ shall be additional to financial obligations of Annex II Parties within the framework of the financial mechanism and regular ODA flows	No credits shall accrue to any Party as a result of greenhouse gases reduced or sequestered during the pilot phase
*Australia ()**	project should involve specific measures to reduce net GHGs initiated as a result of AIJ	must be additional to ODA and other sources under UNFCCC	yes
*Canada ()**	activities must result in measurable reductions of net GHG emissions	activities should be financed outside existing ODA	no emission reduction credits can be claimed by the country of an investing entity against its domestic stabilization commitment to the year 2000
Costa Rica	yes	yes	yes
Germany	yes	yes	yes
Japan	Yes, taking into consideration all leakage effects	additional to financial obligations under Art. 4.3 as well as current ODA flows	yes
Mexico	yes	yes	yes
*Netherlands ()**	minimum annual sequestration requirements for forests	additional to GEF as well as current ODA	will not use AIJ for its present commitments under the FCCC
Norway	yes	additional to GEF as well as ODA	there are no credits to be accrued during the pilot phase and private sector is not granted exemptions or refunds of the Norwegian CO₂ tax or other national policies for participating in AIJ pilot phase activities
Poland	yes	yes	yes
Sweden	yes	yes	yes
Switzerland	yes	yes	yes
United States	yes	must be additional to: GEF, multilateral development bank, ODA, or in excess of U.S. federal funding level in 1993	yes

Project criterion ___ Country	Project was initiated specifically for AIJ purposes	Emission reductions are required to be verifiable, including baseline calculations	Emissions monitoring programme required
*Australia ()**	project should involve specific measures initiated as a result of AIJ	yes	a high degree of transparency should exist
*Canada ()**		measurable reductions required
Costa Rica	considers AIJ proposals	proposals should contain already detailed analysis (defensible reference or baseline case), provisions for independent verification be included in project	yes, in order to establish a high degree of certainty
Germany		actual and measurable benefits required
Japan		yes	yes
Mexico	yes	yes	yes
*Netherlands ()**	projects should be economically sound and would not have been set up without additional AIJ funding	yes	yes
Norway	the scope of the project must be enlarged due to AIJ investments	yes	detailed programme for each reported project
Poland	projects involving technological development and upgrading of equipment, or involving financial resources to procure such technologies and equipment; or projects directly reducing the generation of GHGs in the production of goods and services	it must be possible to estimate ex ante the expected reductions in GHG emissions and monitor ex post the actual reductions in GHG emissions	yes
Sweden
Switzerland		can be easily monitored and verified (e.g., focus on projects that result in significant CO₂ reductions; no sink enhancement projects)
United States	technology or practice must not have been introduced in the region without AIJ, if not, only incremental reductions are counted	verification plan and independent third-party replicability required	monitoring plan required

Project criterion ____ Country	Emission reductions are required to be sustainable	Periodic reassessment of emission reduction estimates	Analysis of other environmental impacts required	Analysis of social impacts required
*Australia ()**		explicit requirement	need to account for impacts	need to account for impacts
*Canada ()**
Costa Rica	durability/quality required		yes
Germany	lasting benefits required
Japan		yes, by project implementation entities	to be adequately assessed and reviewed	to be adequately assessed and reviewed
Mexico	sufficient guarantees required	annual progress reports used as feedback tool	yes	yes
*Netherlands ()**	yes	addressed through monitoring programme	projects should lead to clear beneficial local environmental impacts	project must contribute to the socio-economic position of the local population
Norway	yes	addressed through monitoring programme	analysis provided for each reported project
Poland	yes	yes	activities should not lead to negatif developments of other local/regional environmental quality indicators as a result of achieving reductions in GHG emissions
Sweden
Switzerland
United States	yes	explicit requirement	impacts should be identified	impacts are considered

Project criterion ____ Country	Project must be consistent with sustainable development principles	Project should include a training component in host country	Institutional arrangements in host country	special focus in the pilot phase
*Australia ()**	yes
*Canada ()**
Costa Rica	yes		to the extent local entities could adequately implement and administer projects	development of financial mechanisms to direct the AIJ projects, and marketing
Germany				main emphasis on emission reductions, sinks are not excluded.
Japan
Mexico	yes	need to represent an advance in the country's technical capacity
*Netherlands ()**	projects require sustainable forestry and energy policies	yes
Norway			viewed to be an asset but not a criterion per se
Poland	be sensitive to, and compatible with, macroeconomic policies at national and 'voivodeship' levels	projects which include only technical assistance, education, or training are valuable forms of foreign assistance but they will not be considered as JI projects.		encourage the economic use of natural resource and re-use or recycling of waste materials, and be compatible with, and promote, to the greatest extent possible, the utilization of modern production processes
Sweden				small projects allowing for quick implementation
Switzerland				energy production and end-use (e.g., fuel-switching to low- or no-carbon fuels, renewable energies, enhanced energy-efficiency)
United States