Billions of pounds are being wasted
in paying industries in developing countries to reduce climate change
emissions, according to two analyses of the UN's carbon offsetting
programme.
Leading academics and watchdog groups allege that the UN's main offset
fund is being routinely abused by chemical, wind, gas and hydro
companies who are claiming emission reduction credits for projects that
should not qualify. The result is that no genuine pollution cuts are
being made, undermining assurances by the UK government and others that
carbon markets are dramatically reducing greenhouse gases, the
researchers say.
The criticism centres on the UN's clean development mechanism (CDM), an
international system established by the Kyoto process that allows rich
countries to meet emissions targets by funding clean energy projects in
developing nations.
Credits from the project are being bought by European companies and
governments who are unable to meet their carbon reduction targets.
The market for CDM credits is growing fast. At present it is worth
nearly $20bn a year, but this is expected to grow to over $100bn within
four years. More than 1,000 projects have so far been approved, and
2,000 more are making their way through the process.
A working paper from two senior Stanford University academics examined
more than 3,000 projects applying for or already granted up to $10bn of
credits from the UN's CDM funds over the next four years, and concluded
that the majority should not be considered for assistance. "They would
be built anyway," says David Victor, law professor at the Californian
university. "It looks like between one and two thirds of all the total
CDM offsets do not represent actual emission cuts."
Governments consider that CDM is vital to reducing global emissions
under the terms of the Kyoto treaty. To earn credits under the
mechanism, emission reductions must be in addition to those that would
have taken place without the project. But critics argue this
"additionality" is impossible to prove and open to abuse. The Stanford
paper, by Victor and his colleague Michael Wara, found that nearly
every new hydro, wind and natural gas-fired plant expected to be built
in China in the next four years is applying for CDM credits, even
though it is Chinese policy to encourage these industries.
"Traders are finding ways of gaining credits that they would never have
had before. You will never know accurately, but rich countries are
clearly overpaying by a massive amount," said Victor.
A separate study published this week by US watchdog group International
Rivers argues that nearly three quarters of all registered CDM projects
were complete at the time of approval, suggesting that CDM money was
not needed to finance them.
"It would seem clear that a project that is already built cannot need
extra income in order to be built," said Patrick McCully, director of
the thinktank in California. "Judging additionality has turned out to
be unknowable and unworkable. It can never be proved definitively that
if a developer or factory owner did not get offset income they would
not build their project."
Yesterday a spokesman for the CDM in Bonn said the fund was
significantly cutting emissions and providing incentives for companies
to employ clean technologies: "There is a responsible level of
scrutiny. The process is in continual reform. All the projects are
vetted independently and are then certified by third parties. There are
many checks and balances and we can show how all projects are vetted."
The UK government last night defended the CDM. "We completely reject
any assertions that [it] is fundamentally flawed," a spokeswoman said.
"We've worked consistently for and seen improvement in CDM processes
over the past few years of its operation. We believe the CDM is
essentially transparent and robust, though we will continue to press
for the environmental integrity of projects."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/may/26/climatechange.greenpolitics
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News
and Media Limited 2008