Can the programme of activities save the CDM?

My answer is maybe. Copout yes...bad answer no. The real determinant of where the Programme of Activities saves the CDM will be if NGOs find a way to realize opportunity. The current manifestation of the Programme of Activities is that people are giving away CFL light bulbs and claiming the emissions reductions. 

Environmental benefits=neutral to minimal....remember that CFLs are full of mercury and mercury is bad.

Sustainable Development=negative. 

The basic programme has been that CFLs are distributed at a severely subsidized price (almost half of what they should be sold at...worse are those programmes that give them away). The manufacturer or programme sponsor in return receives all the CDM revenue from any reductions made. They are banking on the fact that people will continue to use these light bulbs when their electricity needs expand. But one thing that isn't considered in the equation is that by promoting these light bulbs as 'energy saving' there is the moral hazard that people will just use more electricity...for example, leave their lights on because they think they are saving electricity just by using them. 

Now this is a bit of an extreme example, and maybe I am reaching a bit. Yet I still think that this is a threat to these programmes, because there is no accompanying social co-benefits. What really happens in the long run...Do CFLs lead to income generation...lower health risks...stop cancer? I can't even imagine the social additionality these people are arguing for their programmes. 

One thing I do think will happen will be a market distortion. If you know someone is going to give you a free CFL, why would you buy one? Why not wait until the programme reaches your neighborhood? And when it is time to buy a new one are you going to wait until someone comes around again or go out and buy a replacement? Also what about the costs of replacing the light fixtures? A lot of people have tube lights which don't readily fit CFLs meant for a single light fixture. 

My question is "When are we going to accept that these programs have been in place for centuries but haven't made a serious dent into the problem of poverty?"