The projections is for Issued CERs until the end of 2012 for issuance in the period 2013-2020.

The 2527 Million expected 2012 CERs from existing projects has been multiplied with the 96.3% issuance success, and the future projects under validation with the 18.5% chance of a negative DOE validation and the 5% chance of being rejected by the EB. The 59% of the projects sent for validation 2003-2006, still being under validation, but with a negative DOE validation has been subtracted.

The CERs expected for coming CDM projects have been estimated using the average expected CERs per month from the 3 last full month (see point 3), which were 11.3 Million CERs/month. Assuming that the number of new project will stay constant at this level, we can add the contribution from each month until the end of the time lags shown in table 3 on the "Analysis" sheet. This adds 325 expected Million 2012 CERs. Reducing these two parts (not the issued CERs) according to time lags with the above mentioned chance of being registered and the issuance success we get the result:  1510Million CERs could be issued before the end of 2012 (or 302 MCERs in each of the 5 years).

The fourth column  shows how many MCERs, not issued in the period 2008-2012, is left over for the period 2013-2020 assuming the issuance in 2008-12 shown in the third column. However, a fifth group of CERs is added. This is for the CERs issued from existing projects after 2012 and until the end of their crediting period, or until the end of 2020 (here we have not added future projects entering the pipeline until 2012).  The total issuance in the period 2013-2020 is  expected to be 5377 MCERs or 672 MCERs/year in each of the nine years.

The calculation of the projected issuance included the timelag until request registration, until registration, until first issuance, and finally the timedelay between last issuance and the present.

The graph above shows the total number of project requesting registration each month (we use the date of signature in the request registration letter from the DOE). The yellow part of the bar shows the number of these projects, that are registered automatically, and the line shows how this fraction has gone down in 2007. The upper part of the bars shows how many of the registered projects entered in the review process. Each of these projects has been given the highest of the following review levels: a request for review, a request for correction after a request for review (correction 1), a review, a request for registration after a review (correction 2), was rejected, or was withdrawn. To include all the projects requesting review, the two upper parts of the bars show the number of projects with no final decision from the EB after the request for review, and the number of projects with no request for review. The graph show a very low number (around 20) projects requesting registration in the period Sept. to Dec. 2007. However, now it has increased to 82 in January 2008. There is a timelag between the date of signature of the request registration letter and the UNFCCC date of request registration.