Emission trading: Carbon Colonialism

What is emission trading and how does it work?  

Under the Kyoto Protocol 1992, many countries have agreed to reduce their emission of gases. It is a market-based approach to controlling pollution. By creating ‘trade-able’ pollution permits, it attempts to add the profit motive as an incentive for good performance. “Cap and trade” is the main form of emission trading. A cap is set on emissions and then permits are created upto the level of this cap. The countries and companies that are covered by the scheme need to hold one permit for every tonne of pollution they emit. The companies have many ways of reducing their pollution level such as investing in clean technologies. However, if they need more permit they can: a) trade permits from other countries/ companies if they have any leftovers. b) invest in “green projects” in developing countries which also counts.

What “green projects” (aka carbon-fixing projects) have been invested in, in developing countries?

1. “mono-culture tree plantation”: theoretically absorbs carbon from the atmosphere
2. Renewable energy projects: solar/ wind projects

https://youtu.be/A3vbLfrubUM

What are the effects of the above projects on developing countries?

Firstly, planting trees need a lot of land which means that many indigenous communities are affected. This has been evident in Uganda, where a Norwegian company seized land for such kind of project which resulted in the eviction of 8000 people in 13 villages.

Also, another project: “eucalyptus plantation” funded by the World Bank and run by a company called “Plantar” in Brazil. Eucalyptus is a kind of tree which is tall and thirsty and has aromatic evergreen leaves, that soaks up a lot of water, this results in water shortages for the local areas. This is particularly bad for farmers who grow food either for themselves or for the market. Many local communities have also been affected by the pollution caused by pesticides and herbicides used for the trees. This has also got negative impact on the environment. Such as contamination of water which kills fish and can cause health problems if drank. This exacerbates poverty even more, because the fishermen can no longer do their job.

Furthermore, the workers on such plantation have little or no health and safety protection and are exposed to hazardous chemicals and dust particles. For instance, Plantar, the plantation company has been prosecuted amongst other 50 companies for illegal outsourcing of labour with extreme degrees of exploitation.

The irony: It is widely known and accepted that carbon stored above-ground (trees) is not equivalent to the carbon stored below-ground (fossil fuels). Therefore, there is no scientific credibility for the practice of soaking up pollution using tree plantation, yet companies invests on such projects. For e.g: planting 1000 trees can soak up only 10% of CO2 from the atmosphere whilst burning 1 tonne of fossil fuel contributes to 20% of the CO2 pollution. — > replacing fossil fuels with renewable energy is a lot more effective in reducing pollution than planting thousands of trees. But companies and governments still build on this illusion of taking action on climate change.

So how is this seen as ‘carbon colonialism’:

Whilst the developed countries are the biggest contributors of world’s pollution and also the biggest consumer of world’s resources, it is the developing countries that have to bear the burden of ‘soaking up CO2’. Instead of reducing it in rich countries, a carbon dump is created in the poor countries. Thus, rich countries can continue in their unequal over-consumption of the world’s resources.