A Critical Conversation on Climate Change ... - Green Choices

More documents

Recommendations

Info

254 development dialogue september 2006 – carbon tradingNo, the same problems hold: how do you quantify carbon savingsagainst an unspecifiable baseline, given the biological and social unknownsgoverning carbon flows in the above-ground systems? (SeeChapter 3.)Yes, climate change can be addressed by trying to conserve forestsjust as it can be addressed by keeping fossil fuels in the ground. Butit can’t be verifiably addressed by burning forests and then ‘compensating’for this burning with biotic projects, any more than it can beverifiably addressed by mining fossil fuels and then ‘compensating’ forthe associated carbon transfer to the biosphere with biotic projects.What’s the future for Costa Rican carbon forestry projects?The government has recently declared that it will put more effort intonon-forestry projects such as windmills and hydroelectric schemes,on the grounds that they are less complicated and yield higher-pricedcarbon credits. On the other hand, companies such as the US-basedRainforest Credits Foundation 61 continue to be eager to set up newcarbon schemes in Costa Rica, often without much prior consultationwith the government.Research for the sectionon Costa Rica was doneby Javier Baltodano ofFriends of the Earth,Costa Rica.India – A taste of the futureAfganistanPakistanNepalChinaBhut.Bang.BurmaIf countries in Latin Americapioneered carbon projects, oneof the countries to attract themost long-term interest amongcarbon traders and investorshas been India.IndiaBy August 2006, the countryled all others in number ofCDM projects registered with82, followed by Brazil with58. 62 Many more are in thepipeline. 63 The Indian governmentis also pressing for nuclearpower and large hydroelectric dams to be allowed to receiveCDM funding, and, according to some observers, hopes to use carbonmoney for developments in the country’s Northeast that would dispossesslocal people of water, land and forests. 64With about 350 projects at various stages of registration, the poten-
offsets – the fossil economy’s new arena of conflict 255tial for non-plantation CDM projects is estimated by one source atmore than 170 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per year,including 90 million tonnes from renewable energy schemes, whilethe potential yield of land-use and plantation projects is put at about78 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent annually. 65 A CDMNational Strategy Study predicts that India could take 10-15 percentof the global CDM market.As social activist Soumitra Ghosh and researcher Hadida Yasminexplain, a ‘friendly and indulgent’ national CDM authority which‘clears CDM projects in India almost as soon as they are submitted’,a ‘ “clean” and aggressive corporate sector’, and a ‘happy bandof new-age national as well as transnational validators, consultantsand project developers have made India a veritable paradise for CDMprojects.’ 66 News about CDM projects and the income they will supposedlygenerate is boosting stock prices in even some of the worstpollutingsectors, such as sponge iron (see below). Accordingly, manyof the big names of the Indian corporate world – Reliance, Tata,Birla, Ambuja, ITC – are moving in, in spite of earlier apprehensionsthat market uncertainty and the complex procedures that CDM involveswould put off big companies.Some of these firms are coming up with smaller-scale projects in renewableenergy and energy efficiency. At an ITC paper and pulp operationin Andhra Pradesh, for instance, six separate CDM projectsare being arranged inside the same factory. Bundled hydro and windprojects—and biomass—are also industry favourites due to a less riskyregistration procedure. However, nearly 85 per cent of Indian carboncredits are being generated by only two projects. Both projects – setup by blue-chip corporations SRF in Rajasthan and GFL in Gujarat –destroy HFCs, which are extremely powerful greenhouse gases usedin refrigeration, air conditioning, and industrial processes. 67Inevitably, social activists are raising questions about whether suchone-off gas destruction projects provide ‘any credible sustainable development’to local communities. 68Why shouldn’t such projects be benefi cial to local communities?First, because HFCs are so bad for the climate, projects that destroythem can generate huge numbers of lucrative credits merely by boltinga bit of extra machinery onto a single existing industrial plant.As a result, there are no knock-on social benefits other than providingincome for the machinery manufacturer and some experience fora few technicians. Second, such projects don’t help society becomeless dependent on fossil fuels. They don’t advance renewable energy
Page 1 and 2:
PRESS RELEASEContact:Linda Chiavaro
Page 3 and 4:
ContentsEditorial note 2Chapter 1 I
Page 5:
editorial note 3in Dorset, UK - poi
Page 8 and 9:
6 development dialogue september 20
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 33 and 34:
Chapter 2‘Made in the USA’A sho
Page 35 and 36:
‘made in the usa’ - a short his
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
100 development dialogue september
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207: 204 development dialogue september
Page 218: 216 development dialogue september
Page 306 and 307:
Page 308 and 309:
Page 310 and 311:
Page 312 and 313:
Page 314 and 315:
Page 316 and 317:
Page 318 and 319:
Page 320 and 321:
Page 322 and 323:
Page 324 and 325:
Page 326 and 327:
Page 328 and 329:
Page 331 and 332:
Chapter 5Ways forwardIn which the c
Page 333 and 334:
ways forward 331‘Tinkering around
Page 335 and 336:
ways forward 333suggests that the
Page 337 and 338:
ways forward 335more stringent than
Page 339 and 340:
ways forward 337Unlike carbon tradi
Page 341 and 342:
ways forward 339hold little appeal
Page 343 and 344:
ways forward 341Waiting their Chanc
Page 345 and 346:
ways forward 343ways - many of whic
Page 347 and 348:
ways forward 345energy - loan benef
Page 349 and 350:
ways forward 347From an Open Letter
Page 351 and 352:
ways forward 349be answered in the
Page 353 and 354:
ways forward 351rogated by Indian v
Page 355 and 356:
ways forward 353argue, they’ve he
Page 357 and 358:
ways forward 355‘The US alone acc
Page 359 and 360:
appendix - the durban declaration o
Page 361 and 362:
appendix - the durban declaration o
show all

A Critical Conversation on Climate Change ... - Green Choices

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?