The science of climate change is quite simple in his heart. If we greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide they emit more heat is trapped in the atmosphere, increasing global temperatures and climate destabilization. to stop the political process that does not happen is infinitely more complex – a complexity embodied in one of the main themes of this UN climate talks this year in Madrid: the international carbon markets. The idea is that, under Article 6 of the 2015 Paris Convention on Climate Change, if a country pays for carbon emissions are reduced in a second country, the first country to count these reductions towards their national targets. If done correctly, the analysts of the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) say that this is the business of international issues could almost double global emission reductions between 2020 and 2035. And ‘the descendant could financially cost of meeting current emissions Pariseren cut commitments want to keep global average temperature well below 2 degrees above the pre-industrial era, of 59% to 79%. But Article 6 is debatable, what could be the reason why is still negotiating the final section of the Paris Convention. If the rules that market issues prevailing are lax exchanged, could be a “huge gap” for the radiator, so that at home they continue to pollute without serious action to take, says Gilles Dufrasne, Policy Officer at Carbon Markets Watch, a ‘ international NGOs This would prevent efforts seriously undermine catastrophic climate change is lacking in Paris would objectives. As countries try hammering of 6 for products rules, countries collide on how to make them stricter. The negotiators of the E.U. and many countries in the developing world, some countries, including Brazil, Saudi Arabia, Australia and India accused of pushing for a system with permissive standards for the reduction of counting emissions and credits that would be easier to make goals Paris, but could undermining global progress cut of greenhouse gas concentrations. Protesters interrupted the conference to highlight the risks of a market system that guides them to stop all greenhouse gas emissions from saying the needs of each country, as soon as possible “What is at stake is whether we limit the climate crisis and reduce emissions, or the only way to do something on paper to do, “says Dufrasne. What is a carbon market? Carbon markets already exist in some countries and regions. In some, such as the “cap-and-trade” systems from E.U. used and California, the government sets a limit to the amount of greenhouse gases that may be emitted by a particular industry or sector of the economy. Companies are getting a salary, how many tons of CO2 they emit given. Those that emit less than their allocation can sell the extra to other companies, each pushing to reduce emissions more quickly. The most important international market regulation of existing carbon, established today under the 1997 UN Kyoto Protocol on climate change. Under the agreement, had targets for industrialized countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, but developing do not. So if a country developing to reduce emissions by a solar plant panel tree or plant for example building, which could have a “credit” to a developed country, the sale, which could include these emissions in its own goal. But this market is actually collapsed due to concerns about the environmental integrity and corruption. The United States has left the Kyoto Protocol in 2001 and the E.U. not as successful were afraid of emission reduction projects as it claims to be, so some potential buyers stopped so that the Member States buys loans in 2012. In Ukraine and Russia who use the loans continue, the researchers found, the company had abused the rich at the expense of the climate system. A report in 2015 found that about 80% of projects under the Kyoto emissions trading scheme with low environmental quality have been and that the system had actually emissions increased by about 600 million tons. The Madrid talks on Article 6 would create a new system to replace the Kyoto Protocol because it could reduce emissions fast Articles 6 and expires carbon markets help in 2020? Among the market mechanisms provided for in Article 6 that countries may exceed their emission reduction targets to sell their excess reductions as credits to other countries that have failed to achieve their goals. In theory, this could be a clear financial incentive for countries creates its emissions faster cutting, and investment funnel aid projects in cheaper and faster for emissions. Carbon markets are always to help businesses also an important tool for countries to mitigate climate change, as companies that climate projects protective race, such as wind farms or build forest replanting, will be able to reduce emissions in countries sell. “The flexibility and efficiency to improve climate action, you can do more with less,” says Alex Hanafi, EDF director of multilateral strategy related to climate. “And because you can do more with less, you can go faster and farther than they otherwise would not cooperate.” Schemes of stop deforestation or prevent the deterioration of the soil are examples in which an effective carbon market could be exchanged to more investment, and turn to convenient reducing greenhouse gases. Take the burning of the Amazon rainforest, which led by President Jair Bolsonaro agricultural policy: “Carbon markets could make such trees worth more alive than they are dead,” said Hanafi. If the market system has been active around the world, and if cost savings were the markets of the new Carbon invested in climate protection – a big “if” given the slow international progress on climate action – the EDF analysts said the reduction of emissions over the next 15 years would make up “77 [billion tons of CO2] in the non-trading for 147 [CO2 billion tons] base case scenario with emissions full Global trading raise a 91% “. Because it could go the carbon markets hurt efforts to reduce emissions? Many climate activists say Article 6 negotiations, the entire target could threaten the Paris Agreement. First, environmentalists fear the risk of so-called “double counting” of emissions reductions, if the rules laid down in Article 6 are not clearly written. Under the Paris agreement, all countries, not just developed ones have emission reduction targets. That is, if India, for example from 1 ton to a photovoltaic regulation in its reduced carbon dioxide emissions, could be both trying to sell credit reduction in Australia, and the reduction of its target count. Carbon markets sustains notes that this sum would be, because half of the CO2 “fraud” would be reduced, maintaining the atmosphere of countries. Second, some countries want to be able to transfer your old loans, the regimes were created in the new Paris, under the Kyoto Protocol. After demand for Kyoto credits collapsed, it went billion in potential loans sold, while the emission reduction projects that they continue to generate – though often without a strong control of their effectiveness. The countries hosting these projects will be able to use the credits according to the new system or to sell. Australia, the game against the relatively low emission target under the credits of the Kyoto Protocol carbon fixed, said it plans to use the old loans to meet their new emission targets – vocal opposition from some 100 countries to cause this week. But some say the climate activists, when it allowed the new system up to 5.4 billion dollars in loans that the United Nations estimates there are watering down ambitions section targets for reducing global emissions might actually an amount more than the total amount of CO2 emitted by the entire EU in 2017. Even if these problems are solved with clear rules that many say long-term in carbon markets, loans have only a distraction from the fundamental necessity for all countries, fossils transition from fuels are. “In a world where we all go to zero net, since no additional attenuation is everywhere you buy or sell,” says Dufrasne. compensate “All the logic of your emissions abroad has no future. And ‘in contrast to the Paris Convention.” What it is at stake in Article 6 of the UN Summit negotiations? If an agreement is reached at the UN summit it is important that is, the robustness of the rules it lays down. But the negotiations close to their planned December 13 is a means certain agreement. negotiators have accused Brazil, Australia and Saudi Arabia to block an agreement that strong rules would. “I’m in the rules clearly do not fight for the ecological integrity”, Bas Eickhout, head of the Conference of the European Parliament delegation told the Euractiv news site. Although no country wants to “weak” rules, openly admits, “If you look at the peculiarities of the Brazilian proposal glance, most countries believe that it is not robust accounting does not reflect, as in the framework of the MOU needed,” says Hanafi, The stand-off over the robustness of the rules, the possibility of an agreement to sink. Dufrasne says countries that are interested in addressing climate change, refuse to make a deal, weak rules is that it can leave the topic for a summit later because “no agreement is better than a bad deal.” “The difference between the Pariseren contract with good markets and Paris agreements with bad markets,” he says, “it is a system where you avoid catastrophic climate change and a system in which we have behind technical details just hiding and not to reduce a tonne of CO2. “Copyright Picture by Getty Images
As part of the Obscure Paris Klimaabkomme can cut twice as many carbon emissions – or are you Massive loophole ‘for polluters
