12.07.2015 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

offsets – the fossil ec<strong>on</strong>omy’s new arena of c<strong>on</strong>flict 303Unfortunately, no. The ir<strong>on</strong> is produced by burning charcoal andreleasing carb<strong>on</strong> dioxide into the atmosphere, and is actually used tomake things like cars, which of course release yet more carb<strong>on</strong> dioxide.In that case, how can Plantar claim that it deserves carb<strong>on</strong> credits? It sounds likeit’s an active part of the industrial system that is accelerating climate change.Plantar and its colleagues at the World Bank have tried many lines ofargument. At first, they said that without carb<strong>on</strong> finance, there wouldbe an ‘accelerated reducti<strong>on</strong> in the plantati<strong>on</strong> forestry base in the stateof Minas Gerais, within the next decade, caused by harvesting of existingforests (now in the last cycle of their rotati<strong>on</strong>s) and lack of investmentinto replanting’. 178 In the absence of carb<strong>on</strong> finance, Plantar andthe Bank insisted, ‘the company would not invest in the replanting ofits forests for the pig ir<strong>on</strong> producti<strong>on</strong>, aband<strong>on</strong>ing them after the finalharvest of the existing plantati<strong>on</strong>s’. 179 When reminded that CDM rulesdo not allow credit to be provided for ‘avoided deforestati<strong>on</strong>’, the Bankrewrote its design documents to emphasise other justificati<strong>on</strong>s.Which were…?First, that Plantar was not avoiding deforestati<strong>on</strong> but rather preventingan otherwise necessary switch in the fuels for its pig ir<strong>on</strong> operati<strong>on</strong>sfrom eucalyptus charcoal to more carb<strong>on</strong>-intensive coal orcoke.Let me get this straight. This company says it deserves carb<strong>on</strong> credits for notdoing something?That’s right. Plantar claims that without carb<strong>on</strong> m<strong>on</strong>ey, the companywould switch over from using charcoal to using fossil fuel. It’s calledan ‘avoided fuel switch’. Because the carb<strong>on</strong> dioxide released by thecharcoal is supposedly mostly absorbed by the new trees grown fornew charcoal, less carb<strong>on</strong> enters the atmosphere than would enter itfrom the burning of coal.But why would Plantar switch over to using coal? Isn’t there enough charcoalto go around?Plantar claims that without extra carb<strong>on</strong> finance for a 23,100-hectareplantati<strong>on</strong> scheme, the charcoal-fired pig ir<strong>on</strong> industry would face a‘supply bottleneck’. It says current plantati<strong>on</strong>s are being depleted andthe lack of forest incentives will render new plantati<strong>on</strong>s financiallyunfeasible without World Bank carb<strong>on</strong> financing. 180 Plantati<strong>on</strong> landwill be ‘c<strong>on</strong>verted to pasture or agricultural land’. 181

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!