Importance of Seaweed in the Climate Change—Seaweed Solution 33
planting and continue until credits were generated. Income includes only the proceeds from CER credits.
The success of a product depended upon regional conditions.
Sub-step 2d. Sensitivity analysis. The most important factors influencing the IRR for this project were the
quantity of product derived, its price, and the cost of operation.
Step 3: Barrier Analysis—The proposed seaweed A/R CDM project activities were not considered
“additive”.
Sub-step 3a: Identify barriers that would prevent the implementation of project tasks: (a) Investment
barriers other than economic/financial. The chances were almost zero that this type of project could
receive a bank loan for implementation because it carried great market risk and was economically
unattractive; and (b) Technology barriers—this project was the first to apply such new technology with
associated risks.
Sub-step 3b: Show that these identified barriers would not prevent the implementation of at least one
alternative to the project as proposed. Alternative utilization of marine substrates might not have faced
the obstacles mentioned above.
Step 4: Common Practice Analysis—The proposed seaweed A/R CDM project activities are considered
“additive”.
Although national and local programs determined the overall purpose in developing this project,
achieving our objectives would most likely depend upon how we utilized funds. In the target region, the
level of financial support for the construction and restoration of seaweed forests had been very limited for
several years. No domestic monies were available for investing in its implementation. In addition, this
CDM could not replace reforestation activities, but had to be included within the scale and range of other
programs because vast regions require such reforestation efforts.
Step 5: Impact of CDM Registration
This A/R CDM project was created to ease economic and financial burdens and satisfy perceived barriers.
Thus, the following benefits could be generated by its initiation:
• Revenue from sales of CER credits would increase because of the removal of carbon from the
atmosphere. Without this project, the amount of sequestered carbon reserves would either decline or
remain stable at very low levels in the target region as environmental degradation continued.
• As a pilot venue for assessing the financial activities related to future carbon businesses, the
stakeholders who observed this project would be motivated. Direct experiences would provide some
incentive to participate in a carbon market that would involve verification, confirmation, exchange,
and the willingness to develop new projects.
ₒ Investment cost: KRW 53,400,000 (for 0.5 ha).
ₒ Expected CER profit (EUR9/tCO 2 eq): EUR576 ha
–1
yr
–1
.
ₒ Expected IRR (economic analysis): Currently, CER revenue is very small compared to the level of
investment, making IRR calculations meaningless. Thus, a larger project must be considered (500
ha or more).
ₒ Addition: This is secured with economic additions, including CER credits.
Because one could recognize this project area as a carbon sink only if no mature seaweed had been
harvested when the seaweed pilot farm was constructed, approval of the current project and any additions
related to problems associated with such harvesting could not be made in principle.
B.5 Detailed baseline information
The baseline was set for a devastated coastal area without a history of seaweed vegetation. This
information included the date of completion for baseline research and the participants and organizations
involved in conducting that research.
planting and continue until credits were generated. Income includes only the proceeds from CER credits.
The success of a product depended upon regional conditions.
Sub-step 2d. Sensitivity analysis. The most important factors influencing the IRR for this project were the
quantity of product derived, its price, and the cost of operation.
Step 3: Barrier Analysis—The proposed seaweed A/R CDM project activities were not considered
“additive”.
Sub-step 3a: Identify barriers that would prevent the implementation of project tasks: (a) Investment
barriers other than economic/financial. The chances were almost zero that this type of project could
receive a bank loan for implementation because it carried great market risk and was economically
unattractive; and (b) Technology barriers—this project was the first to apply such new technology with
associated risks.
Sub-step 3b: Show that these identified barriers would not prevent the implementation of at least one
alternative to the project as proposed. Alternative utilization of marine substrates might not have faced
the obstacles mentioned above.
Step 4: Common Practice Analysis—The proposed seaweed A/R CDM project activities are considered
“additive”.
Although national and local programs determined the overall purpose in developing this project,
achieving our objectives would most likely depend upon how we utilized funds. In the target region, the
level of financial support for the construction and restoration of seaweed forests had been very limited for
several years. No domestic monies were available for investing in its implementation. In addition, this
CDM could not replace reforestation activities, but had to be included within the scale and range of other
programs because vast regions require such reforestation efforts.
Step 5: Impact of CDM Registration
This A/R CDM project was created to ease economic and financial burdens and satisfy perceived barriers.
Thus, the following benefits could be generated by its initiation:
• Revenue from sales of CER credits would increase because of the removal of carbon from the
atmosphere. Without this project, the amount of sequestered carbon reserves would either decline or
remain stable at very low levels in the target region as environmental degradation continued.
• As a pilot venue for assessing the financial activities related to future carbon businesses, the
stakeholders who observed this project would be motivated. Direct experiences would provide some
incentive to participate in a carbon market that would involve verification, confirmation, exchange,
and the willingness to develop new projects.
ₒ Investment cost: KRW 53,400,000 (for 0.5 ha).
ₒ Expected CER profit (EUR9/tCO 2 eq): EUR576 ha
–1
yr
–1
.
ₒ Expected IRR (economic analysis): Currently, CER revenue is very small compared to the level of
investment, making IRR calculations meaningless. Thus, a larger project must be considered (500
ha or more).
ₒ Addition: This is secured with economic additions, including CER credits.
Because one could recognize this project area as a carbon sink only if no mature seaweed had been
harvested when the seaweed pilot farm was constructed, approval of the current project and any additions
related to problems associated with such harvesting could not be made in principle.
B.5 Detailed baseline information
The baseline was set for a devastated coastal area without a history of seaweed vegetation. This
information included the date of completion for baseline research and the participants and organizations
involved in conducting that research.