Carbon Trading: Attacking Warming with a New Tool, or Shell Game?

[IDemo]

The concept of 'carbon trading' has sounded questionable to me since I first heard of it, but I have seen it cropping up more often lately in environmental news, so I decided to look into it a bit further.

What, exactly, is "Carbon Trading"? Think pork bellies. Green ones.

"In essence, emissions trading takes advantage of the capitalist system, by treating carbon dioxide as a commodity. By creating a demand for carbon dioxide reduction, and measuring the supply of carbon dioxide, a price is established. Since businesses react to changes in cost inputs, one would expect that the behavior of the people that manage the business will be modified to minimize any costs, and therefore their CO2 emissions."

Emissions trading uses the principle that the atmosphere is a global commons, and it doesn't matter where the emissions reduction occurs, as long as it occurs. It creates a financial value for reducing emissions, which acts as an incentive and can be used to fund carbon abatement projects (tree planting, for example).

No surprise here; countries and companies may not feel motivated to lower their greenhouse gas output unless a profit motive exists. Personal carbon trading has been proposed as well in the UK. Here, individuals would be given credits which would be spent with each energy purchase. Those who use less energy than average would receive cash back, while those using more would essentially be taxed for the difference by having to buy more credits.

Personal carbon trading may not sound like an effective way to reduce a global carbon problem, but may in fact prove very useful in the long run. Each individual produces, on average, about five tons of carbon yearly. In fact, an argument has been made that the passenger should be the holder of credits that the EU will soon make available to airlines.

Two questions remain: Can carbon trading actually make any measurable difference in global CO2 levels, and will nations/corporations/citizens be sufficiently motivated to invest?

Actually, a third question might be: how can the US be expected to participate in the global carbon market after refusing to sign on to Kyoto, the planet-wide handshake of agreement that carbon dioxide actually needs to be reduced in the first place? With about 23% of the total carbon output world wide, the US is the Hummer in the china shop. If carbon reduction is viewed as without value by our government, will citizens and corporations act for the sake of the environment?


==>> Calculate your personal carbon footprint here

[applegrove]

1. It makes it perhaps profitable in the near future for companies to put

better & cleaner technology in place. So they may invest in clean technology sooner rather than later.

[phantom power]

2. Shell Game.

[Massacure]

3. As long as carbon rights are taken out of the trading system over time,

Then there isn't anything wrong with it.

[Reterr]

4. kick

[IDemo]

5. Current carbon trading news worldwide

From the UK: Miliband plans carbon trading 'credit cards' for everyone

Patrick Wintour
Monday December 11, 2006
The Guardian

Every citizen would be issued with a carbon "credit card" - to be swiped every time they bought petrol, paid an energy utility bill or booked an airline ticket - under a nationwide carbon rationing scheme that could come into operation within five years, according to a feasibility study commissioned by the environment secretary, David Miliband, and published today.

<snip>

Under the scheme, everybody would be given an annual allowance of the carbon they could expend on a range of products, probably food, energy and travel. If they wanted to use more carbon, they would be able to buy it from somebody else. And they could sell any surplus.
.......................................................................................

Thailand: Govt warned about carbon credit scheme

APINYA WIPATAYOTIN

A researcher on global warming has warned the government that it would be repeating the mistakes of other developing countries if it adopts the controversial carbon trading scheme under the Kyoto Protocol on climate change.

The attempt to cut greenhouse gas emissions through a market mechanism of carbon trading has been a failure and has led to rising emissions of the gases that fuel global warming, said Larry Lohman of the United Kingdom-based research group Corner House.

<snip>

"Since the scheme's introduction almost two decades ago, I have not seen any significant movement from neither states nor private sectors in reducing greenhouse gas emissions... demand on fossil fuel, a major source of greenhouse gases, has increased every year" Mr Lohman said.

" are only a licence for big polluters to carry on business as usual." Forest plantation projects in developing countries, such as Brazil, Uganda, Sri Lanka and India, were clear examples of the failure of the CDM scheme, as they created land-use conflict in the countries, Mr Lohman noted.

"The governments seized farmland to use as forest plantations under the Kyoto Protocol's CDM scheme. A similar trend is going on in many other parts of the world," he said.
.......................................................................................

Australia: Govts urged to boost carbon trading incentives to farmers

AgForce wants the state and federal governments to encourage farmers to be involved in the carbon trading market.

AgForce chief executive officer Brett de Hayr says the latest national State of the Environment report highlights the role farmers can play in helping communities to adapt to climate change.

He says the federal and state governments should give incentives to farmers like carbon trading, to allow them to sell offsets against emissions by planting more trees.

"We have mining companies in this state ... who are paying farmers in other countries for carbon trading, yet we've failed to take the opportunity to put them together with their neighbour," he said.