Climate talks at Cancun: a long way to go
Sunday, 12 December 2010
THE 12-day COP 16 at Cancun ends today but whether or not the climate change negotiations will yield something substantial for the protection of mankind's one and only habitat from becoming more and more 'feverish', is yet to be seen. For Bangladesh, coping with global warming and climate change no doubt calls for long-term cooperative action with key global powers, and most importantly wise action at home. Under the climate change framework, Bangladesh wants appropriate technology transfer and adequate finance for adaptation and mitigation as well as compensation for conserving forest resources and other vital carbon sinks. At this point in time therefore, it comes as a shock to learn that an international oil company having operations in Bangladesh, has reportedly been permitted to drill and extract gas from Block 14, which is just about 500 metres from the Lawachara Reserve Forest, regardless of prohibitions under the Bangladesh Wildlife (Preservation) Order 1973.
Environmentalists at home who have been calling for a just, transparent and legally binding agreement not only to trade in carbon emissions but also to protect the land, water and forests, are no doubt appalled by so much discrepancy in what the government says and does. Environmental 'clearance' has been 'managed' as usual. Given the good environment minister's position at Cancun, this is a severe anomaly that must be rectified forthwith.
A good part of the 'debt', that the over-consuming developed countries would have to pay the worst sufferers of climate change is expected to come from the global market in carbon emission credits -- under a cap-and-trade system which sets a ceiling on the carbon emissions of a given country or industry and allows trading of pollution permits within the cap. This 'polluter-pays principle' is expected to lead to the growth of carbon credits to around two trillion dollars a year by 2020! Although this complex trading system is not without its critics, conserving Bangladesh's forests means earning much-needed credits. This provides a strong reason why a review of the decision about drilling and extracting gas in Lawachara is needed on both economic and environmental grounds.
The Durban Group for Climate Justice, an international network of independent organizations, individuals and grassroot movements, has been opposing carbon trading on the grounds that rather than halt global warming it is likely to make matters worse for it does not focus on the core problem, and that is, the continued extraction and consumption of fossil fuels. Instead, the most powerful governments and corporations are bent on 'buying' the space (to pollute) from low, or no-emission countries that are deemed to have lots of space to absorb the rich world's carbon load! In other words, the earth's carbon-cycling capacity is being turned into 'property' to be bought or sold in the global market. By creating this new commodity -- carbon -- the same corporate powers that are destroying the climate will continue to call the shots and go on 'buying' space regardless of the earth's ability and capacity to support a climate conducive to life and human societies. This is bound to magnify the problems for it actually gives the biggest polluters licence to go on emitting more than the earth can take.
With the industrialized countries' emission-reduction plans centred around trading these tricky carbon credits with the South, rather than actually cutting their own emissions -- as is required urgently for the good of all life on earth -- can Cancun offer anything better than Copenhagen? Needless to say, the urgency to curb runaway GHG has been effectively diluted by the politics of climate change, both at home and abroad. Without radical change, for deep ecological governance the world over, to establish equity within and among nations as core principles, all these conferences are bound to be no more than diversionary talkshops.
Environmentalists at home who have been calling for a just, transparent and legally binding agreement not only to trade in carbon emissions but also to protect the land, water and forests, are no doubt appalled by so much discrepancy in what the government says and does. Environmental 'clearance' has been 'managed' as usual. Given the good environment minister's position at Cancun, this is a severe anomaly that must be rectified forthwith.
A good part of the 'debt', that the over-consuming developed countries would have to pay the worst sufferers of climate change is expected to come from the global market in carbon emission credits -- under a cap-and-trade system which sets a ceiling on the carbon emissions of a given country or industry and allows trading of pollution permits within the cap. This 'polluter-pays principle' is expected to lead to the growth of carbon credits to around two trillion dollars a year by 2020! Although this complex trading system is not without its critics, conserving Bangladesh's forests means earning much-needed credits. This provides a strong reason why a review of the decision about drilling and extracting gas in Lawachara is needed on both economic and environmental grounds.
The Durban Group for Climate Justice, an international network of independent organizations, individuals and grassroot movements, has been opposing carbon trading on the grounds that rather than halt global warming it is likely to make matters worse for it does not focus on the core problem, and that is, the continued extraction and consumption of fossil fuels. Instead, the most powerful governments and corporations are bent on 'buying' the space (to pollute) from low, or no-emission countries that are deemed to have lots of space to absorb the rich world's carbon load! In other words, the earth's carbon-cycling capacity is being turned into 'property' to be bought or sold in the global market. By creating this new commodity -- carbon -- the same corporate powers that are destroying the climate will continue to call the shots and go on 'buying' space regardless of the earth's ability and capacity to support a climate conducive to life and human societies. This is bound to magnify the problems for it actually gives the biggest polluters licence to go on emitting more than the earth can take.
With the industrialized countries' emission-reduction plans centred around trading these tricky carbon credits with the South, rather than actually cutting their own emissions -- as is required urgently for the good of all life on earth -- can Cancun offer anything better than Copenhagen? Needless to say, the urgency to curb runaway GHG has been effectively diluted by the politics of climate change, both at home and abroad. Without radical change, for deep ecological governance the world over, to establish equity within and among nations as core principles, all these conferences are bound to be no more than diversionary talkshops.