Korean Journal of Organic Agriculture (한국유기농업학회지)

Korean Association of Organic Agriculture (한국유기농업학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

An Analysis on the Invest Determinants of CDM Project: Evidence from Waste Handling and Disposal Sector

CDM 사업부문별 투자비용 결정요인 분석: 폐기물 부문을 대상으로

  • 김지훈 (건국대학교 일반대학원 농식품경제학과) ;
  • 임성수 (건국대학교 경제통상학전공)
  • Received : 2020.10.30
  • Accepted : 2020.11.19
  • Published : 2020.11.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In this study, the characteristics of the waste sector CDM project were analyzed through cluster analysis of the waste sector CDM project and the analysis of the CDM investment cost in waste sector using CDM project data registered with UNFCCC since 2008 when EU ETS phase 2 began. As of September 2020, 772 cases of CDM projects in waste disposal and disposal are registered. Biogas technology is the largest, followed by livestock manure processing and biomass production technology. The results of the cluster analysis are summarized as follows: First, on average, projects utilizing AWMS technology are small in size and relatively low in investment costs. This is judged to be relatively low investment costs due to previously attracted foreign investment capital. Second, the average investment cost of CDM projects considered along with waste (No.13), the energy industry (No.1) and agriculture (No.15) was higher than those involving only waste. The analysis of the factors determining the investment cost of the waste sector CDM project showed that, as with cluster analysis, the AWMS technology, which is a livestock manure treatment technology, was lower in the investment cost than those that use other technologies. As a result of multiple regression analysis, the investment cost of the CDM project was analyzed lower in the order of biomass, AWMS, LFG and biogas. Also, the higher the investment cost for CDM projects linked to waste, energy and agriculture, and the better the investment environment, the higher the investment cost. Although no statistical feasibility was obtained, the larger the annual emission reduction, the lower the CDM investment cost.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

이 논문은 2018년도 건국대학교 KU학술연구비 지원에 의한 논문임.

References

  1. Aldenderfer, M. S. and R. K. Blashfield. 1984. Cluster Analysis. Series: Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, SAGE University Paper 44, Newbury Park.
  2. Chae. D. J. 2020. Waste arteriosclerosis, Change of policy to troubleome. Energy & Environment News. http://www.e2news.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=226475.
  3. Jung. S. C. 2018. International Caron Market Mechanism and Implications. Research Report. Ministry of Environment.
  4. Kim, S. Y. and H. J. Park. 2008. Research on Price Discovery Process of CO2 Allowance Trades in EU Markets. Journal of Economics Studies. 26(1): 1-20.
  5. Korea Environmental Industry & Technology Institute. 2013. The State of the Carbon Market. Volume 92.
  6. Lho, S. W. 2011. A Test on Price Volatility of CO2 Emission Trading Permits focusing on ECX and CCX. Journal of Environmental Policy. 10(2): 45-60.
  7. Lim S. S. 2016. Analysis on the price Determinants of Primary CER in Agricultural Sector. Korean Journal of Agricultural Management and Policy. 43(1): 178-196.
  8. Lim, S. S. and S. R. Yang. 2008. An Analysis on the Determinants of the Price of Primary CER. Environmental and Resource Economics Review. 17(4): 691-717.
  9. Mo, J. Y., S. R. Yang, and Y. S. Cho. 2005. The Law of One Price and Dynamic Relationship between EU ETS and Nord Pool Carbon Prices. Environmental and Resource Economics Review. 14(3): 569-593.
  10. Official Microsoft Blog (https://blog.microsoft.com). Microsoft will be carbon negative by 2030. 2020.
  11. Park, S. C. and Y. S. CHO. 2013. Analysis on Price Driver of Spread and Different Patterns of EUA and sCER. Environmental and Resource Economics Review. 22(4): 759-784.
  12. Rudd, P. A. 2000. An Introduction to Classical Econometric Theory, Oxford University Press, Inc.
  13. UNFCCC EB, https://cdm.unfccc.int
  14. World Bank, https://datacatalog.worldbank.org/dataset/worldwide-governance-indicators