Wednesday, September 24, 2008

The Carbon Conspiracy

In the name of carbon trading, developed countries are offering developing countries paltry handouts to keep development in check while they go ahead in leaps and bounds

A PROBE report

Climate change is on us. Ardent environmentalists and hardened skeptics alike are ready to admit this. It is a reality that has caught global attention and which is causing concern among developed and developing countries alike. We are, after all, under one sky. Given the magnitude of the issue, climate change is now one of the most important social, economic and political issues of all time. Atmospheric gases responsible for causing global warming and climate change have increased by 25% since large scale industrialisation began a century and a half ago. World carbon dioxide (CO2) was expected to increase by 1.8% annually between 2004 and 2030. Other greenhouse gases (GHGs) are methane, nitrous oxide and some which are less significant.
Global bodies have taken up the climate change issue in all earnest. There is the Inter-Governmental Panel of Climate Change (IPCC), the Asian Development Bank, the World Bank, UN bodies, the European Union bodies and others all making a loud clamour about climate change. It is commonly acknowledged that it is the industrialised nations which are the main cause of global warming, what with their excessive carbon emissions and other forms of industry-related pollution. And the developed world is bearing the brunt. However, as has been the propensity, it is the wealthy developed nations which are now drawing up rules and regulations, imposing restrictions, and the developing countries, with exceptions, that are acquiescing with characteristic complacency, bordering on fatalism.
A study reveals that where annual carbon emissions are concerned, USA and Canada take the lead. This region, in 2000, was spewing out nearly 1800 million metric tonnes of carbon annually. This has increased manifold since. This region is followed by Western Europe. Bangladesh, given its insignificant industrialisation, is nowhere on the carbon emission map. Yet Bangladesh is having to pay the price. If the Asian Development Bank is to be believed, this region is particularly vulnerable to climate change, threatened with freshwater shortages by 2020. Crop yields could drop by half within 2050. And Bangladesh in particular will be vulnerable to flooding. Even if all this is taken with a pinch of salt, the fact remains that the spectre of climate change looms large in our horizon.
Kyoto Protocol
As one of the mechanisms to address this problem, the Kyoto Protocol was drawn up in 1997. This is linked to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and sets binding targets for 37 industrialised countries for reduction of 5.2% GHG emissions against the 1990 level over its commitment period until 2012. For EU the target is 8%. In short, countries are to cut down on carbon emissions. The industrial and other sectors of these countries must take measures to this end, to curtail their contribution to global warming. Ironically, USA is not a signatory to this protocol despite being the highest on the carbon emission charts.
The big industrial players invariably find a way of wriggling out of paying the price for their “sins”. Since 2005, about 12,000 energy intensive plants of EU have been able to buy and sell permits to allow them emit carbon dioxide. There are three flexible mechanisms to enable countries with quantified emission limitation and reduction commitments to acquire GHG reduction credits: International Emission Trading (IET), Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Joint Implementation (JI). There is even consideration for a Stock Exchange for carbon credits!
The second category, CDM, applies to Bangladesh. Under this, a developed country can tie up GHG reduction project activity in a developing country. The developed country would be given credits for meeting its emission reduction targets, while the developing country would receive the capital and clean technology to implement the project. This is, in plain language, carbon trading. The developed country continues at its own pace of carbon emissions, while paying a country like Bangladesh to cut down on their’s, thus earning carbon credits. Outside the Kyoto Protocol compliance regime, an alternative carbon trading market is emerging. This is the Voluntary Emission Reduction (VER) framework. It has no internationally recognised central body.
What has Bangladesh done so far?
So far Bangladesh has set up a National CDM Board and CDM committees for approval of CDM projects. The Board has approved two CDM projects so far with a few in the pipeline. In comparison, India has approved 360 projects and Sri Lanka 105. There are plenty of CDM opportunities in Bangladesh: Afforestation and conservation of forests as tree tissue stores significant amounts of CO2; methane tapping and better use of methane waste; use of electrical vehicles; advanced rice production technology; electricity cogeneration from sugarcane; solar home systems; wind turbine; energy saving cooking stoves, CFL lamps, etc.
There is a garbage disposal project in Matwail where biodegradable waste is being converted into compost fertiliser and so the methane emissions are being reduced. The project could earn points but is still tied up with the local CDM committee. It will have to go to the CDM executive board under UNFCC for approval. The irony of it all is that while Bangladesh is still not a carbon producing country in any sense of the term, the government has already made carbon commitments on par with the countries which produce high amounts of carbon annually. The bottom line is, while the industrialised countries continue in their industrialisation and development, countries like Bangladesh will adopt a carbon neutral development strategy, keeping tangible industrialisation at bay. In other words, Bangladesh cannot get wealthy. It will accept a few token handouts to keep its carbon output in check and hand the carbon credits to the wealthy world so it can get wealthier.
“Bangladesh must not settle for any aid funds or loan packages in this connection. Bangladesh must demand hard compensation in no uncertain terms,” says an analyst of global politics. “It’s like telling a rich guy in Europe that he can drive his SUV while we ride on cows, as long as he hands us a few euros — then too he’ll tell us to change our cow’s diet so it doesn’t belch out methane gas into the air!” says an irate industrialist in Bangladesh. It’s like the developed world is buying permits to pollute. “Poor countries smell money in the climate-change negotiations,” reads an article in The Economist.
Such carbon trading can be suicidal for the developing countries in the long run. Myopic policies can stunt a poor country’s growth and keep it in the poverty rut forever. “Such international negotiations have the distinct stench of conspiracy” says an observer of the energy scene in Bangladesh, “It’s a conspiracy to ensure the poor countries remain poor while the rich get richer.” “It’s like the myths being propagated that Bangladesh will soon be completely submerged under the sea, when in actuality, a satellite map will show you how the country is growing by 20 sq km a year,” he continues. “Such negative reports fed into the media serve to weaken the national psyche.”
And it is because of such weakened national psyche that Bangladesh jumps into non-conclusive agreements. Rather than getting entwined in such one-sided negotiations, Bangladesh needs to build a robust economy. It must exploit its existing resources to this end, whether gas, coal or whatever.
CONSPIRACY AGAINST COAL
One must always be on the watch out for the furtive do-gooders who do more harm than good in the name of the environment, public interest, etc. They change colours quicker than a chameleon. For example, years ago when talk was on about a nuclear power plant at Rooppur, there was a hue and cry about the health hazards and dangers of such a plant. Now in this critical hour of need where power is concerned, coal has been discovered at Phulbari. This coal mine is being equated with a gold mine in the sense it can fire a much needed power plant, providing electricity to the electricity-starved country. It can provide fuel to the innumerable brick fields leading to the infrasructural development of the country. It can contribute more than substantially to the country’s economy. Environmental and social concerns about the project are also being taken care of in the way of tree-planting, water management, rehabilitation and other projects. The tree-huggers now decide to welcome the nuclear power plant deal with China and turn their vitriolic attention towards the Phulbari coal mine.
Certain vested quarters are loud and vocal against the mining of coal at Phulbari and the establishment a coal-fired power plant. They see carbon spewing into the air, covering the world in a cloud of black smoke, all in contravention to those conventions and protocols being touted around the globe. Yet this very same righteous bunch remains mysteriously and absolutely silent about the coal coming in from India across the border. This substandard coal is so high in sulphur content that it is not even being used in India itself. The Bangladesh government is sanctioning import of this hazardous coal even though it exceeds permissible levels of sulphur. Yet it is dragging its feet on approving the Phulbari coal mine where the coal is of such low sulphur content and of such a high standard that it is almost on par which the coal of Newcastle. When the chimneys of the brick fields churn out the sulphur-infested pollution into the air,
where are GHG concerns then?
Delay in starting up the Phulbari coal mine is extremely harmful in more ways than one. Not only are we delaying in the production of electricity and wasting money on inferior quality imported coal, we are missing out on the deadline for carbon emissions. The carbon trading policy has a dateline until the year 2012. The year 2012 is vital because after that, rather than carbon trading, there will be carbon capture and storage. Carbon offsetting will no longer be in the scheme of things. Bangladesh is simply not prepared for this.
While polluters tend to make millions from the European carbon permit scheme, Bangladesh sits back twiddling its thumbs. That is nothing short of a travesty. Bangladesh must make hay while the sun shines. If the development of the coal sector is slowed down, Bangladesh will lose its CO2 emission rights. At these crossroads, Bangladesh faces a dilemma. In the name of internationalism, quarters urge it to reduce global warming by sacrificing industrialisation in Bangladesh; to move towards low-carbon economy; and to depend on international carbon funds and aid. However, nationalism dictates that Bangladesh maximise carbon emission rights. It must maximise economic growth and industrialisation.
The bottom line is, if Bangladesh wants to survive in this dog-eat-dog system of global economy, the coal sector should be developed as fast as possible to justify higher emission rights. And Bangladesh should not bear the burden of global warming by suppressing coal sector development. It is ironical that coal and other industries in the developed world are flourishing and injecting more carbon into the air and growth into their economies, while we are expected to sit back and put a cap on our coal so a balance can be struck. They are emitting excess carbon into the air and we are helping out by emitting less. Oh, and in the process we’ll earn a few Brownie points.
Source: http://www.probenewsmagazine.com/index.php?index=2&contentId=4376
Date: 19-25 September 2008, Bangladesh

No comments: