Carbon Credit Watch

TabGroup

The Issue

For 30 years we have monitored the threat of global warming. Over that time, we have never once thought it justified, as many others have, to raise the alert to a “code red” – a threat to our planet that requires extreme and immediate measures. We still don’t think it should be.

Why? Because of our experience with unaccountable global institutions, we didn’t trust the UN Kyoto process and the donor agencies that put the world on red alert; we saw how global concern would undermine local concerns about substantive issues like deforestation, air, and water pollution.

Thanks to the groundbreaking book The Deniers, published by our sister organization Energy Probe, we learned that the science is not settled on man-made global warming, we realized the models are not reliable and that bigger climatic forces may be at play.

Once the science is in, it is possible that CO2 will be rehabilitated to the traditional view of it – as nature’s fertilizer, a gas that benefits the biosphere rather than threatens it.

To our mind, the theoretical threat of global warming has always paled next to the real and present dangers posed by long-known pollutants and threats from habitat loss and degradation.

Until the science is settled on the global warming threat, we argue, reduce the known contaminants, such as NOX, SOX, and mercury, through energy conservation and efficiency improvements and polluter pay mechanisms.

Moreover, we believe the manic focus on CO2 has led to unfortunate and disturbing results. It used to be the dam builders, the nuclear power advocates and the polluters who shut down debate over their pet projects on the grounds that they knew best and detractors didn’t understand the science and economics of their industries.

Now it is mainstream environmental NGOs in rich countries who are shutting down debate over the threat of global warming, by vilifying and assigning ulterior motives to experts and the public who dare to question the scope of the threat.

It is a sad day when environmentalists impede scientific inquiry and public debate.

But worse, in the pursuit of cutting CO2 emissions, a global warming industry of polluters, governments, and international funding agencies has, by decree, turned carbon into a commodity and created “markets” on which to trade the right to produce it in the form of “carbon credits.”

The environment, and the well-being of those who depend on it, is now truly threatened. Coal burning industries in industrialized countries are buying the right to continue polluting by paying poorer countries to “reduce” global CO2 either by limiting their own development building or by offsetting industrialized country emissions by building hydro dams and planting mega forestry schemes.

Flooding from hydro dams has forced the resettlement of millions and stricken their lives with impoverishment, while mega forestry projects cause immeasureable harm to local ecosystems.

Everybody loses except the polluters, the aid bureaucracies, and governments who can falsely claim to be “green.”

On these pages, Probe International will bring you the details of these disasters-in-the-making and how to stop them. Let us know your views by commenting in our Forums or by contacting us your own carbon credit stories. We will do our best to cover them for the benefit of the debate.

TabGroup2

Latest News

Filter by keywordFilter by content source

'Carbon cowboy' in PNG legal spat

02/26/2010

Australia's self-proclaimed 'carbon kingpin' Kirk Roberts is being investigated by a Papua New Guinea government agency for allegedly misleading villagers in deals he hopes will net millions.  read more »

The great carbon con

Brady Yauch
02/23/2010

Optimists say the carbon market could one day be worth as much as $2-3-trillion dollars if countries like the United States implement a legally-binding cap-and-trade system. But those numbers may be wildly optimistic in the wake of the scandals involving scientists and research centres supporting climate change and the recent political back-tracking on implementing cap-and-trade schemes. More realistically, the carbon market  is struggling just to stay relevant.  read more »

Carbon markets deflating in the wake of Copenhagen

Brady Yauch
02/22/2010

After political leaders failed at December's climate summit in Copenhagen to agree to a successor to the Kyoto Protocol, the price of carbon has been slowly deflating. Many investors are now wary of pouring more money into a scheme that depends on political will, rather than economic fundamentals.  read more »

View All News

TabGroup3

Sources

Filter by keywordFilter by content sourceFilter by type

Carbon accounting challenges: Are you ready?

11/03/2009

The development of carbon markets worldwide has created a host of challenges for companies – and of these challenges, accounting is perhaps one of the least understood. After all, even Europe (a four-year veteran of carbon trading) still has not come to consensus on how to account for emission allowances. Carbon traders in the United States have only begun to grapple with the accounting issues of an already complex and unfamiliar market. Moreover, as carbon markets evolve and incorporate new elements, additional accounting challenges will continue to emerge.  read more »

Carbon credit fraud: The white collar crime of the future

11/01/2009

Australia’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) will soon require the largest emitters of greenhouse gases to offset their carbon footprint. Such schemes have already been subject to fraud, misstatement and the involvement of organised crime in the UK and Europe. Deloitte Forensic is now warning Australian companies and regulators to prepare for the potential fraud risks.

Avoiding Fraud: It’s not always easy being green

09/01/2009

Fraud in the green market can take many forms – from intentionally inaccurate carbon footprint measurements to misleading green marketing claims to the double counting of carbon offset credits. In addition to these “environmental” fraud risks, there is another set of fraud risks that companies should be aware of, especially if they are thinking about entering into the carbon offset market. These are considered “transactional” fraud risks, examples of which are explained below.
 

View All Sources

TabGroup4

Blogs

Filter by keyword

Breathe of fresh air: banks pull out of carbon market

Banks and other investors are pulling out of the carbon market after government leaders at last month’s meeting in Copenhagen failed to come up with new emissions targets beyond the current Kyoto Treaty, which ends in 2012. According to a recent report in the UK Guardian, a number of carbon financiers have already begun leaving banks in London due to a lack of activity and a pull-back in investment demand.  read more »

CBC's Rex Murphy on "Climategate"

CBC’s Rex Murphy weighs in on the controversy surrounding the hacked documents from servers at the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU).  read more »

Even before Climategate, the public suspected fraud

59% of Americans say it's at least somewhat likely that some scientists have falsified research data to support their own theories and beliefs about global warming, according to a Rasmussen survey released yesterday. 35% say it's Very Likely and just 26% say it's not very or not at all likely that some scientists falsified data.  read more »

View All Blog Entries

TabGroup5

TabGroup6

TabGroup7