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

Chapter 3Lessons unlearnedIn which carbon trading, contrary to slogans about the universal eff ectivenessof markets in dealing with environmental and social problems, is shown to beill-suited to addressing climate change. The experience of the US in pollutiontrading is demonstrated to be an argument not for, but rather against, makingcarbon markets the centrepiece of action on global warming.IntroductionPollution trading, the last chapter has pointed out, is a US inventionnow at the centre of efforts to address climate change worldwide. It’sbeing enthusiastically pushed by governments, international organisations,business and even many NGOs.The rest of this special report will argue that this approach isn’t working,and even threatens to derail more constructive movements to addressglobal warming. The US experience with pollution trading isan argument not for, but rather against, greenhouse-gas trading programmessuch as the Kyoto Protocol and the European Union EmissionsTrading Scheme.But I thought pollution trading was a huge success in the US!That’s what carbon trading proponents often say. The reality is morecomplicated. US pollution trading schemes have produced no morereductions, and spurred less innovation, than traditional regulation,to say nothing of other possible programmes for cutting emissions.US pollution trading schemes have cut only short-term costs, andonly for some actors, have raised many questions of equity, and inmany ways have distracted attention from fundamental issues.Equally importantly, the conditions that made possible the bestdesignedUS emissions trading scheme – the US’s sulphur dioxideprogramme – are simply not present in global regimes for controllinggreenhouse gases.I don’t understand. What could be wrong with trading? Isn’t trading alwaysthe most effi cient way of reaching a given goal?