| THE
CASE AGAINST CARBON TRADING
CARBON TRADING IS CONTRARY
TO SOCIAL JUSTICE
THE LARGEST RESOURCE GRAB IN HISTORY
You can't trade in something unless you own it. When governments
and companies "trade" in carbon, they establish de facto
property rights over the atmosphere; a commonly held global commons.
At no point have these atmospheric property rights been discussed
or negotiated - their ownership is established by stealth with every
carbon trade.
THE CARBON TRADE WILL STRENGTHEN EXISTING INEQUALITIES
Market shares in the new carbon market will be allocated on the
basis of who is already the largest polluter and who is fastest
to exploit the market. The new "carbocrats" will therefore
be the global oil, chemical, and car corporations, and the richest
nations; the very groups that created the problem of climate change
in the first place. What is more, with the current absence of "supplementarity",
the richest nations and corporations will be able to further increase
their global share of emissions by outbidding poorer interests for
carbon credits.
THE CLEAN DEVELOPMENT MECHANISM POSES A DIRECT
THREAT TO VULNERABLE PEOPLES
Many of the projects proposed within the CDM, in particular tree
planting and dams, are subject to the same criticisms as other large
scale development projects- they assert foreign ownership of local
resources, they consolidate the power of undemocratic elites, they
oust people from their land, they undermine local self sufficient
economies and low carbon cultures.
MANY OF THE SOURCES OF CARBON CREDITS
ARE SCAMS
TREE PLANTING IS NOT A SOLUTION TO CLIMATE CHANGE
Carbon absorbed by forests is only removed from the carbon cycle
for as long as the tree is standing and alive. Industrial forestry
will not sequester carbon. Permanent reforestation is a once only
removal of carbon from the cycle and cannot offset sustained overproduction.
CARBON TRADING ENCOURAGES COMPANIES TO PROFIT FROM
EFFICIENCIES THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN INTRODUCED ANYWAY
Because we cannot know the future, we can have no certainty that
any project selling carbon credits has really reduced its emissions
further than it would have done without the intervention. Profit
competition and technical innovation ensures that industry consistently
reduces its energy costs. A carbon market can provide an automatic
cash subsidy for any investment in low energy technology. If such
incentives exist they should be explicit, targeted and accountable.
"HOT AIR" TRADING IS AN ACCOUNTING FRAUD
Russia's economic collapse since 1990 has reduced its emissions
by 30%. Russia is intending to sell this incidental windfall (often
call "hot air") as international carbon credits- potentially
swamping the market. If countries subsidise their emissions with
these Russian credits, the final global emissions will end up being
exactly the same as they would have been without a carbon market
or a Kyoto protocol.
HUGE INCENTIVES FOR CHEATING
There are strong incentives for cheating and creating bogus credits
that do not represent any real reduction in emissions. The vendor
gets the cash without having to change anything and the buyer gets
cheap credits. There are similar incentives for misdeclaration,
and "leakage"- transferring polluting activities to areas
that are not accounted.
CARBON TRADING CANNOT WORK
THE CARBON MARKET CANNOT BE MONITORED OR CONTROLLED
The temptation for all parties to cheat requires that every transaction
to be scrutinised and every sale to be certified. There is no global
institution or accounting system that can manage the complexity
of this market.
THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK WILL NEVER BE STRONG ENOUGH
International legal frameworks are usually very weak. Countries
that want to use carbon credits to subsidise their emissions are
already arguing for penalties so weak that they will not discourage
cheating. Many of the Annex 1 (Russia, Turkey, Ukraine), Romania-
these are some of the most corrupt and lawless countries are corrupt
or desperate for foreign currency and will happily endorse doctored
carbon credits.
CO2 IS NOT SO2
The main model for carbon trading is Sulphur Dioxide (SO2) emissions
trading under the US 1990 Clean Air Act. This programme faced none
of the problems listed above- it was small (a few hundred companies),
easy to monitor (one pollutant from one source-power generation),
had permanent targets, and, above all, was conducted within one
country with strong enforcement mechanisms.
CO2 IS NOT CFC
The only international emissions trading has been in CFCs under
the Montreal Protocol. Once again, the programme was small (only
17 producer companies), easy to monitor (one pollutant from one
industrial process), and within a strong legal framework.
CARBON CREDITS FROM DIFFERENT SOURCES ARE NOT EQUIVALENT
The market assumes that carbon credits from different sources will
be fully interchangeable ("fungible" in carbospeak). However,
carbon sequestered in sinks is a completely different product from
the carbon "saved" by a technical innovation, which is
different again from the carbon "saved" by a social or
lifestyle change. Add to this the complexity of trading in different
greenhouse gases. Each source requires different monitoring rules,
different criteria and different agencies. Forcing them to be interchangeable
in one market is a recipe for corruption and fraud.
THE REAL REASONS FOR CARBON TRADING
Supporters of carbon trading will argue that these are not problems-
they are challenges. "Just because it is hard, does not mean
that we should not take action", they say. Let's be clear that
carbon trading is not being supported because it will solve climate
change. In fact it will undermine even the pathetic emissions reductions
already proposed. The real reasons for carbon trading are:
1. Governments want to be assured of a cheap way to
buy off their failure to meet their Kyoto targets which will keep
public and corporations quiescent.
2. Brokers, accountants, and financial institutions are extremely
excited at the thought of the size of their cut in a new $2.3 trillion
speculative market.
3. Corporations and other major polluters want pliant governments
who don't punish them for their emissions and hand over public money
to pay for any emissions they are forced to make.
4. Oil companies support carbon trading as a way to avoid making
any cuts in oil production.
5. Academics and financial consultants see rich pickings from becoming
"experts" in the new market.
CARBON TRADING WILL NOT SOLVE CLIMATE
CHANGE
THE KYOTO PROTOCOL HAS BEEN HIJACKED BY CARBON
TRADERS
Corporations, the finance industry, and their government supporters
demanded the insertion of carbon trading throughout the Kyoto Protocol
as a condition for their continued support for the process. The
intergovernmental negotiations are now concerned almost entirely
with the structure and management of this vast international carbon
trading regime.
CARBON TRADING IS AN EXCUSE TO AVOID REAL EMISSIONS
REDUCTIONS
The hopelessly compromised Kyoto Protocol now allows countries to
meet all their emissions reductions with carbon credits bought through
three forms of carbon trading; Joint Implementation, Clean Development
Mechanism, International Emissions Trade. Some countries will certainly
choose to buy credits rather than make any serious attempt to reduce
their underlying dependency on fossil fuels.
THE REAL SOLUTIONS TO CLIMATE CHANGE ARE UNDERMINED
BY CARBON TRADING
· Educate the public on the urgency of climate
change and the need for dramatic solutions
Carbon trading is a false solution and undermines individual responsibility
· Set a schedule for cutting global fossil
fuel consumption by up to 60%.
Carbon Trading is an excuse for avoiding any significant net cuts
· Recognise the moral (and political) imperative
for fairness and social justice by allocating targets to every country
on the basis of equal per capita emissions
Carbon Trading institutionalises existing inequalities and rewards
the largest polluters
· Reduce the supply of fossil fuels with an
international ban on all new oil, gas and coal development. As a
first step, cut the $200 billion per year global subsidies for coal
and oil power.
Carbon trading is not concerned with the supply of fossil fuels,
which is why oil companies support it. As a result, government subsidies
are increasing, reducing the price of energy and swamping any attempts
at demand management.
· Invest heavily in renewable energy to replace
all fossil fuel supplies
Although Carbon Trading promotes itself as funding renewables, this
is far more expensive per ton of carbon than credits from bogus
"hot air", tree planting, or outright fraud. These cheap
carbon credits will set the market price and soak up the capital.
· Involve people at all levels of society in
solutions
Carbon trading is an inherently elitist, corporatist, technocratic
solution. It provides no role for civil society, and fails to deal
with the 50% of emissions from houses and personal transport.
RisingTide UK March 2002
|