Thomas Grammig

curriculum vitae
office:  +49 - 61.72 - 31.673
you are here >
> back to mindmap

Even after 20 years of Montreal Protocol implementation, Greenhouse gases from all cooling equipment worldwide added up still contribute approximately as much to global warming as all aviation.  Available technologies can eliminate a large part of the Greenhouse gases from direct emissions of refrigerant liquids (the chemicals circulating in refrigeration circuits, esp.fluorocarbons).  The Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism can accelerate technical change in that sense when CDM methodologies are designed to address these Montreal Protocol leftovers.

The World Bank Carbon Finance Unit has shown the way by creating a methodology for chillers (large building air-conditioners), AM60, against considerable hesitation among the U.N.-FCCC´s Methodology Panel (10 years later EB34 para 17 is not pertinent anymore).  The large unit size of chillers is favourable to the typical CDM project design.  Household refrigerators are a bigger challenge.  Unfortunately, UNIDO (with Swiss funds) and Indian manufacturers Godrej and Videocon have established AM70 and AM71, methodologies for household refrigerator production, that are regionally limited and workable only for the biggest producers.  Godrej and Videocon then withdrew and chose not to apply the methodologies they had helped to create.  LG subsequently tried and failed to use it.

At the same time, GIZ-Proklima created AMS-III.X under my guidance, a CDM methodology operating further down the refrigeration value chain and giving the gains from global emissions trading to households opting for the most efficient refrigerators.  The success of AMS-III.X is also due to a strategic Public-Private Partnership between GIZ and Bosch/Siemens (BSH) I have designed.  Here are the main components of the approach:



Causality Map Resulting
from AMS-III.X

Public-private Partnership
Impact Evaluation


GIZ Journal CDM
in german

CDM for low-income

Modernizing refrigeration
equipment with CDM

Policy dimensions      

AMS III.X is a unique methodology by combining

I would be thankful if you comment on these policy aspects and write to me whether you see these as realistic.

While sustainability criteria are the task of national CDM bodies (only rare DNAs get there), this methodology demonstrates poverty reduction via definitions of eligibility criteria, operational and monitoring parameters obligatory for all ensuing projects.  In every country electricity distribution and use is marked by socio-economic factors that permit CDM methodologies to alleviate energy poverty and create in particular health and gender co-benefits.
Public-Private Partnerships between development agencies and CDM technology providers (with most advanced technologies) hold much potential to raise methodology quality, to create co-benefits and to bring carbon trading benefits to end users.  I conclude that, despite the ample policy declarations about public funds leveraging private sector capital during all CMPs, such "PPP for emissions trading" remain unexploited because they are unfamiliar for both sides (political scientists at SFB 700 at Potsdam University pursued the "PPP as carbon governance" for several years and others will hopefully follow).

The new appliances methodology AMS-II.O was approved by EB66 (march 2012)

"Dissemination of energy efficient household appliances".

AMS-II.O targets the opposite end of the household spectrum.  Whereas AMS-III.X is effective in a low-income context with second hand refrigerators, AMS-II.O aims at middle and high-income households.  Appropriately, AMS-III.X was funded with public funds through GIZ (200k€) and AMS-II.O was financed from the leading appliance manufacturer.  This can inspire other technology leaders to harness the CDM for supporting their marketing.  An additional sale of a high efficient unit gets CO2 emission reduction credits when the efficiency is sufficiently above a market benchmark.  Developing country markets are opened for Super-efficient technology years before this occurs otherwise.
AMS-III.X is the only CO2 mitigation methodology that GIZ ever helped to create and AMS-II.O is the only methodology where KfW was involved.  Each of the two main development assistance bureaucracies in Germany tried (and succeeded) only once.  I believe the main reason for their reluctance is that their masters in the Development Ministry (BMZ) are very risk averse.  Certainly my efforts to explain the importance of household appliances for CDM was not that convincing, while the strong involvement of Bosch/Siemens was much value for GIZ and KfW.  I can also state with certainty that nobody in GIZ or KfW ever asked me why these succeeded.

The new framework for standardized baselines refrigerators and air-conditioners approved by EB97 (november 2017)

RAC is a sector highly suitable for a standardized baseline for all appliances in a market or market segment, creating differentiated incentives that were not possible with existing CDM methodologies.  Defaults are required for four different emission reductions through project activities that any manufacturer, importer, wholesaler or retailer might find suitable for its commercial position.  1st through new advanced appliances, 2nd replacing old appliances, 3rd changing refrigerants and 4th switching PUR blowing agents.  For example, a retailer cannot switch blowing agent in an appliance, but he can switch between brands with different blowing agents, and so this emission reduction is possible along the chain.  Households' purchase decisions can get incentives from these baselines. 
Without defaults for each of these four emission reductions, monitoring RAC appliances would remain prohibitive (only Samsung ever got some CERs for its high efficient refrigerators in India).  I defined this approach, developed defaults and roadtested them for the secretariat.  A central concern with this standardized baseline is to calculate emission reductions at any point in the supply chain where one or all four of these emissions reductions are created, either with technological or commercial choices.

    "Tool 29: Determination of standardized baselines for energy-efficient refrigerators and air-conditioners"

    "AM0120: Energy-efficient refrigerators and air-conditioners"

Furthermore, this standardized baseline thoroughly integrates the energy efficiency labelling used in most countries around the world.  Details about the Chinese, European and Brazilian labelling classes are reflected in the annexes and similar conversion factors should be added to reflect label metrics of exporting countries such as Thailand, South Korea and Japan.  Label metrics, so effective in the EU and in China's market transformation, suitably integrated in the standardized baseline shall connect the CDM to the myriad of existing Demand-side Management policies.  For Air-conditioners, all SEER conversions are in the annex, only the Indian SEER version has to be added.  Another further development of this standardized baseline is reflecting the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol and the HFCs phasedown funding from the Multilateral Fund.  But perhaps Kyoto and Montreal Protocols will continue to ignore each other.

The current "Guidelines for the establishment of sector specific standardized baselines" contain a distinction of Measure 1: Fuel and feedstock switch and Measure 2: Switch of technology with or without changes of energy sources.  This distinction is not suitable for many sectors.  The RAC standardized baseline's adequacy to the RAC sector lies precicely in the above mentioned four emission reductions.  The current Guidelines are too abstract to be useful. Instead of the measure fuel switch and another measure technology switch, such distinctions of measures have to be defined anew for each sector.  The current Guidelines contain an excessive Cartesian ambition.  Commercial strategies in a sector fit poorly into abstract measure types.  AMS-III.X and AMS-II.O are reflected in the RAC standardized baseline.  However, a few clarifying details in AMS-III.X helpful for PP's have been removed.  RAC manufacturers were completely absend during the assessment of this RAC standardized baseline.  I hope to explore the adequacy of this standardized baseline for their marketing strategies.  A standardized baseline could at least remain open to a positive and constructive relation between a country's DNA and the main market actors.