"The only solution I can see is to hold a series of long and costly negotiations in exotic locations, in order to put off finding a solution", reads the caption of a Climate Action Network (CAN) cartoon lampooning the 12th session of the subsidiary bodies of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, held in Bonn, Germany, from June 12-16. One meeting at the conference spent 45 minutes debating whether to take a 15-minute break.
After years of procrastination, a major climate change conference in November is expected to finalise rules governing implementation of the Kyoto Protocol. Even if some sort of deal is stitched up then, it will not come into force if too few countries ratify the protocol.
The protocol, an agreement reached in Kyoto in 1997, calls for the major industrialised powers to reduce greenhouse emissions by an average of 5.2% from 1990 levels between 2008 and 2012. Under the protocol, the US must reduce emissions by 7%.
The rich industrialised countries trying to undermine international efforts to reduce greenhouse emissions are aiming to turn the Kyoto Protocol into a farce by exploiting loopholes which will make it far easier to meet emission targets without reducing emissions.
Rather than an environmental protection initiative, the Kyoto Protocol is becoming an trading agreement for a new commodity, carbon. Countries exceeding their carbon emission targets will be able to buy the emissions of those countries that have already achieved their targets in the international carbon market to off-set excess emissions. An open-ended international carbon trading system would act as a disincentive to reducing greenhouse emissions.
The use of carbon "sinks", such as plantations, to off-set greenhouse gas emissions is shaping up as another huge loophole. All sorts of phony reductions might be allowed.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change released a report in May which warns that the Kyoto Protocol could:
-
include incentives for clear-cutting old-growth forests by allowing countries to cut down old growth forests with no carbon cost and then claiming carbon credits for tree plantations or reforestation;
-
encourage the clearance of native forests for fast growing monoculture plantations or genetically engineered trees; and
-
allow sinks credits to take over the reduction target of the Kyoto Protocol, providing no incentives for real pollution reduction.
'Chernobyl Deployment Mechanism'
Another rort in the greenhouse negotiations is the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), which gives developed countries greenhouse credits for funding projects which reduce emissions in developing countries. The CDM risks becoming the "Chernobyl Deployment Mechanism" by providing subsidies for Western nuclear suppliers to export nuclear power to the Third World.Nuclear suppliers — in particular the US, Japan, France, UK and Canada — are desperate for orders for new reactors. Australia and New Zealand also support the inclusion of nuclear power in the CDM.
Industrialised countries are supposed to reduce greenhouse emissions by over the next decade, but loopholes could allow an increase of 15-20%. Consequently, big business is warming to the Kyoto Protocol, if unevenly.
In the US, a number of multinationals have defected from the Global Climate Coalition, the US front group for climate skeptics. Defectors include BP, Texaco, Shell, Daimler Chrysler, Ford and General Motors.
Non-government organisations and environment groups pointed to the US, Canada, Japan, Australia and New Zealand as the worst "carbon criminals" among more than 120 nations at the Bonn conference.
According to Bill Hare, Greenpeace International's climate policy director, "These governments are trying to create the impression that they are moving ahead on climate policies while in reality they are systematically attempting to shred every last bit of environmental integrity from the Kyoto Protocol."
The CAN awarded the World Bank the "Greenwashing Award" for its "Prototype Carbon Fund" for renewable energy projects. Not all prototype carbon funds will be spent on renewable energy; the most the World Bank will say is that the fund will have an "emphasis" on renewable energy.
The $150 million fund has been created alongside the World Bank's usual pollution-for-profit programs. Since 1992, the World Bank Group has spent $13.6 billion on fossil fuel projects which will, over their lifetimes, release 37.5 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide.
'Down-under duo's dirty deals'
CAN observers at the Bonn gabfest were scathing in their criticisms of Australia and New Zealand, saying that the "down-under duo's dirty dealings" included working diligently to limit information to the public, opposing meaningful consequences for countries failing to meet emissions targets, and opening wide loopholes for sinks.A June 10 CAN paper said, "Both Australia and New Zealand seem quite willing to include perverse incentives to cut down old growth forests and replace them with fast growing plantations. So, will the marriage last? Will others take the risk of associating themselves with the positions of the duo? And finally, how many more 'fossil of the day' awards must the two get before they see the light?".
The Australian government is also pushing for a scheme in which countries exceeding their emission targets could simply "borrow" emissions from future commitment periods, thus balancing their greenhouse accounts.
BY JIM GREEN