Accounting for flexibility against uncertain baselines: lessons from case studies in the eastern European energy sector

The Kyoto Protocol defines two project-based flexibility mechanisms: joint implementation (JI) and the clean development mechanism (CDM). The main methodological problem associated with both these mechanisms is the choice of an appropriate baseline: since the baseline is, by definition, counterfactual, it imposes considerable uncertainty on the accounting framework. Little work to date has been carried out on trying to estimate how large this uncertainty might be for particular project types. This paper aims to fill this gap by proposing an approach to baseline construction which explicitly acknowledges this uncertainty This approach is illustrated through the examination of pilot JI projects in the energy sector in eastern Europe, and then discussed in terms of its implications for climate policy. The results presented are estimates of the range of counterfactual uncertainty in greenhouse gas emission reductions based on the construction of a number of possible baselines for each project. This range is found to be about +/- 35% for demand side projects, +/- 45% for heat supply projects, +/- 55% for cogeneration projects, and +/- 60% for electricity supply projects. Estimates of uncertainty in the costs of the pilot projects are also found to be high. The paper discusses the problems arising from such large uncertainty and starts to indicate how this uncertainty may be managed.