The Ministry of Ecology and Environment recently announced the issue of falsification of carbon emission report data from four carbon verification agencies.
The specific problems of the named enterprises include tampering with forged test reports, instructing and guiding the production of false coal samples, going through the motions of verification work, non-compliance with procedures, obviously inaccurate conclusions, and suspected fabrication of false test reports.
Not long after the national carbon emission trading market entered the second compliance cycle, it resolutely said "no" to "carbon fraud", releasing a strong signal to strengthen data quality supervision, maintain the authority of the national carbon market system, and ensure fair trading.
Ensuring the authenticity and accuracy of carbon emission data is becoming the focus of the construction of the national carbon market.
In the first implementation cycle of the national carbon market, a total of 2,162 key emission units in the power generation industry were included, covering an annual greenhouse gas emission of about 4.5 billion tons of carbon dioxide.
Since the launch of the national carbon market, the overall operation has been healthy and orderly, and the transaction price has been rising steadily.
However, the national carbon market has been in operation for less than a year, and some companies and units have falsified carbon emission data and disrupted the order of the carbon market.
Behind the "carbon fraud" lies the shadow of "carbon interests".
According to estimates, a company with an annual carbon emission of 10 million tons, based on the current carbon price of 60 yuan/ton, can save 60 million yuan a year by manipulating data to reduce emissions by 10%.
In addition, the emergence of "carbon fraud" has also exposed that individual carbon verification third-party organizations are mercenary and lack objectivity and independence.
Carbon verification should help emission control companies understand the many details involved in carbon emissions, and calculate their own carbon emissions and carbon assets. While improving the quality of carbon market data, it is more conducive to the functioning of the carbon market.
However, individual carbon verification agencies have misinterpreted the "sutra".
For example, a company named this time, in the consulting contract signed with the emission control enterprise, promised to “turn losses into profits for power plant carbon emission allowances and realize quota enrichment under the condition that the allocation plan and accounting method remain unchanged.”
Knowing that the company did not retain historical coal samples, he instructed and instructed a number of emission control companies to temporarily prepare coal samples to replace the monthly mixed coal samples in 2019 and 2020 to supplement the elemental carbon content measurement.
The carbon verification agency violated professional ethics and misused its mind on opportunism.
Real, accurate and effective carbon emission data is an important basis for the allocation of carbon emission quotas, and also the basis for starting carbon trading and ensuring the effective operation of the carbon market.
If there is fraud at the data generation level and data review level, it will inevitably seriously affect the seriousness and authority of carbon trading. If it is not stopped in time, it will form a "broken window effect", which will bring irreversible negative effects.
Defend the authenticity and accuracy of carbon emission data, and put forward more urgent requirements for data quality supervision.
Relevant departments have previously carried out special supervision and assistance for key technical service institutions and related emission control enterprises in the power generation industry, focusing on key links such as coal sample collection, coal quality testing, data verification, and report compilation, on-site supervision and inspection, the above problems are precisely in the discovered during this process.
However, more efforts are needed to fundamentally eliminate data fraud.
For example, focus on key links and core elements, and formulate technical guidelines and working procedures for carbon emission data verification covering the entire process.
Accelerate the formulation of industry access for carbon emission data verification agencies, and clarify violations and disciplinary measures.
Accelerate the establishment of industry associations to issue industry norms, standardize industry behavior, and improve the level of industry self-discipline.
The "policy patches" that should be played and the "training courses" that should be patched should be advanced in time.
It is necessary to further strengthen the supervision and management of technical service institutions, standardize consulting, verification, and testing service behaviors, ensure that technical service results are true, compliant, and fair, and ensure the stable and healthy operation of the carbon market.
The "carbon fraud" case came into the public eye, showing that there is no regulatory blind spot in the construction of the national carbon market.
At the same time, it also alerts emission control enterprises to truly take responsibility for emission reduction, make great efforts to effectively promote pollution reduction and carbon reduction, and promote the sustainable development of enterprises.
It also requires regulatory departments at all levels to act quickly to deal with new situations, solve new problems, increase further investigations into relevant technical service institutions and relevant enterprises, and resolutely investigate and deal with illegal data reporting, concealment, fraud and other violations of laws and regulations, so as to consolidate the effectiveness of the carbon market. The lifeline of specification operation.
Jin Guanping