[Cc-webedit] [Fwd: Re: [networking] G20 Flyer Feedback + websites]

[Jonathan Leighton]

Can I make a suggestion that we give our carbon trading literature a bit
more prominence on the website. It's not just related to G20 but
represents a major issue we are tackling for the whole year.

I propose we put a menu item below "Climate Camp G20" called "Carbon
Trading", which contains the fact sheet text. Then we can have a
sub-menu item of "Recommended Reading" which would contain the current
contents of http://climatecamp.org.uk/g20-why.

We could then add additional sub-menu items, such as printable leaflets
etc, as and when it's necessary.

Do people think this is a good idea? If so I can implement it.

Cheers,
Jon

On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 18:27 +0000, website at climatecamp.org.uk wrote:
> Hi James,
>          I've put this up as a page linked to the main G20 page.
> In peace Neil
> 
> 
> >
> >
> > i think we should add the text of the carbon trading factsheet to
> > http://climatecamp.org.uk/g20-why or perhaps somewhere else on the site?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > What is carbon trading?
> > Don't leave it to the market - leave it in the ground!
> >
> > Carbon trading is the main way in which wealthy industrialized countries
> > and companies are avoiding their emissions reduction targets – by
> > trading carbon credits amongst themselves, either between countries (as
> > happens under the Kyoto Protocol) or between companies (as happens under
> > the EU Emissions Trading Scheme). Essentially, it’s the way that
> > industry can continue as usual, while encouraging the poor and
> > disadvantaged to sell their rights to pollute.
> >
> > This fact sheet is primarily for climate activists and independent
> > journalists. We hope will also provide the basis for discussions,
> > sloganeering & media work.
> >
> > Carbon trading is aimed at the wrong goal
> > Carbon trading is aimed at the wrong target. It doesn’t address climate
> > change. Solving climate change means figuring out how to keep remaining
> > fossil fuels in the ground. It means reorganizing industrial societies’
> > energy, transport and housing systems – starting today – so that they
> > don’t rely on coal, oil and gas. Carbon trading isn’t directed at that
> > goal. Instead, it’s organized around keeping the wheels on the fossil
> > fuel industry as long as possible and making it seem politically
> > excusable to go ahead with new carbon-intensive infrastructure, like the
> > 3rd runway at Heathrow and the proposed new coal-fired power plants,
> > like the one at Kingsnorth. Carbon trading allocates industries a
> > generous short-term numerical emissions budget and then tries – through
> > trading – to make it cheap and easy for them to continue business as
> > usual within those budgets, by buying credits from less economically
> > developed countries and companies. We need climate action, not business
> > schemes.
> >
> > So far, carbon trading has been one disaster after another
> > Even if you were to accept that it might be a good idea, carbon trading
> > has been a massive failure so far and doesn’t show any signs of
> > improving. The price of carbon has always been so low that it’s always
> > cheaper for companies to buy permits than to start paying for more
> > expensive infrastructural changes. The allocations of permits have been
> > so generous that a number of Europe’s biggest polluters have made HUGE
> > profits by selling on permits that they didn’t need, or by passing on
> > the cost of the permits to consumers – despite the fact that they have
> > been handed out for free! E.ON is just one example of a company that has
> > made billions in windfall profits so far from carbon trading. We need to
> > learn from these mistakes, not replicate them.
> >
> > Leaving it to the market is ineffective and undemocratic
> > Markets themselves aren’t a bad thing, but not when they artificially
> > create overly-complex markets based on an ideological commitment to
> > solving every problem through the market rather than a natural evolution
> > of trading in existing commodities. Important decisions, discussions and
> > demands about climate change are being swept aside in favour of ‘leaving
> > it to the market,’ despite the fact that it’s a market whose parameters
> > and rules have been largely determined by some of the biggest polluters
> > around, teaming up with the same financiers responsible for the
> > ‘structured investment vehicles’ and ‘credit derivative swaps’ that have
> > brought economies crashing down. They say markets, we say democracy.
> >
> > Carbon trading interferes with positive solutions to climate change
> > On India’s Bhilangana river, local farmers run a finely-tuned terraced
> > irrigation system that provides them with rice, wheat, mustard, fruits
> > and vegetables. This ingenious, extremely low-carbon system of
> > agriculture is threatened by a new hydro-electric project designed to
> > help power India’s heavy industry. Villagers may have to leave the
> > valley, losing not only their livelihoods but also their knowledge of a
> > uniquely sustainable modern technology. Is carbon trading stepping in to
> > support the villagers’ piece of the solution to climate change? On the
> > contrary. It’s supporting the hydropower company, which has hired
> > consultants to argue that their dam will result in fewer carbon
> > emissions than would have been the case if it had not been built. The
> > firm plans to sell the resulting carbon emission rights to polluting
> > companies in Europe. The example is typical of the way carbon markets
> > are undermining positive approaches to climate change everywhere. The
> > bulk of carbon credit sales under the Kyoto Protocol benefit chemical,
> > iron and steel, oil and gas, electricity and other companies committed
> > to a fossil-fuel intensive future, not communities, organizations or
> > firms working to overcome fossil addiction. We need grass-roots, modern,
> > sustainable solutions, not outdated financial interference.
> >
> > The financial crisis rings enormous alarm bells about carbon markets
> > Carbon trading, like the financial system that led to current economic
> > crisis, is characterised by incredibly complicated accounting procedures
> > that very few people really understand. Just like our current financial
> > institutions, it’s formed around a profit-driven motivation to make
> > large numbers of transactions regardless of the ‘sub-prime’ nature of
> > those transactions, and fundamental problems in asset valuation. The
> > whole concept of carbon trading is based on taking a ‘real’ need (in
> > this case, the need to reduce carbon emissions) and abstracting that
> > need into increasing complicated financial commodities and derivatives.
> > There is a real parallel with the way a basic human need like housing,
> > was transformed and abstracted through financial markets to ‘sub-prime
> > mortgages’ and eventually ‘Structured Investment Vehicles’. The
> > complexity of this process of creating financial derivatives doesn’t
> > serve any human need other than making huge sums of money for small
> > numbers of people, and in doing so creates enormous instability and
> > turmoil once the house of cards inevitably collapses. We need
> > grass-roots control of our needs and communities, not the disastrous
> > instability of market based ‘solutions’.
> >
> > Trading carbon doesn't cure our addiction to fossil fuels
> > Setting a price for carbon isn't even a very good way of stopping people
> > emitting it.  We use fossil fuels because we started using them and then
> > it became a habit, this is called lock-in – the way a technology becomes
> > ingrained in society even though it isn't the best available – a good
> > example is the QWERTY keyboard – this arrangement of letters was
> > designed because typewriters jam if you type too fast, on computers this
> > isn't a problem but we still use the same technology that is obviously
> > less good, and even if other keyboards were cheaper people wouldn't use
> > them.  This 'lock in' also doesn't respond to gradual changes, it
> > requires a sudden change to break these irrational habits. We need to
> > recover from our fossil fuel addiction, not prolong it.
> >
> > Measuring emissions isn’t easy
> > One surprising problem with any numerical system of emissions
> > restrictions is that it's quite difficult to measure them. Additionally,
> > this sensitive and vital task is not done by an independent body:
> > polluters themselves are actually responsible for collecting data on
> > both their current and past emissions, data against which any reductions
> > will be measured! There is evidence that one of the problems with the
> > Emissions Trading Scheme is that the figures on which reductions were
> > based were massively over estimated by the polluters. We need commitment
> > to change, not complication, corruption & stagnation.
> >
> > Carbon trading represents the total privatization of the planet
> > Accepting the concept of a right to pollute in exchange for money is, in
> > effect, like selling the sky. There are certain things in which there
> > should never be a complete market. Although land can be bought and sold
> > relatively freely, most societies regulate who can own land, how much
> > and what you can do with it, otherwise it is theoretically possible for
> > one person to own all the land and to decide to leave it uncultivated -
> > and no society could tolerate this. So why should we allow this to
> > happen to the atmosphere? By carving up the atmosphere itself, all of
> > our notions of democracy and fairness become at best ridiculous, and at
> > worst, obsolete. We need equality, not ownership.
> >
> > If you were an energy company…
> > If you were an energy company that relied predominantly on fossil fuels
> > and a worldwide carbon trading system was to be brought in: first, you'd
> > be lobbying to make sure that the scheme suited you, then you'd get as
> > many permits as possible by lobbying and claiming that your past
> > emissions were higher than they really were. You'd find cheap ways to
> > generate credits by buying into schemes that created permits (often in
> > the developing world) and you'd employ a group of hotshot traders to buy
> > and sell your permits to try and increase the number you had.
> >
> > In addition you'd ensue that the people regulating the system were as
> > friendly to you as possible and you'd probably try and make sure that
> > the emissions recorded for your power plants were recorded as low as
> > possible. If all else failed, you'd pass on the increase in costs to
> > your customers, perhaps even with a bit extra because all the energy
> > companies will be doing the same. You could also invest some time in
> > persuading the regulators that this technology was reducing emissions
> > more than it really was. Each year as the government tried to reduce the
> > number of permits, you'd also try and make sure that yours were cut a
> > bit less than everyone else's, while your lawyers argued in the courts
> > that the government can't take away what is essentially your property
> > (your permits to pollute) without compensating you monetarily.
> >
> > What are the alternatives to carbon trading?
> > This is a bit of a false question: it presumes that carbon trading has
> > some sort of merit that justifies it being included in the selection of
> > possible options available. Its like asking, what’s the alternative to
> > implementing an ineffective, unjust system to deal with climate change
> > that rewards the biggest polluters and that has very harmful
> > consequences for communities in the Global South?
> >
> > The most obvious and rational alternative is to simply not do it. There
> > are a wide variety of ways to reduce emissions that are appropriate for
> > different individuals, communities, companies and countries. Any of
> > these many ways forward should be evaluated (along with important
> > factors like equity and social justice) on the criteria of whether or
> > not it allows us to move away from extracting and consuming large
> > amounts of fossil fuels. Carbon trading does exactly the opposite of
> > this – it sanctions further fossil fuel burning. Climate justice now!
> >
> > Compiled for the Climate Camp National Gathering, Nottingham, March 7th
> > 2009.
> > Revised for the London Climate Camp Carbon Trading Weekend, March 21st
> > 2009.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > James Holland
> >
> > http://risingclevel.blogspot.com/
> >
> > Jonathan Leighton wrote:
> >> We have http://climatecamp.org.uk/g20-why from a list compiled by Kevin.
> >>
> >> Kevin also told me a while ago he was going to work on a longer piece of
> >> text, I don't know whether that is still happening.
> >>
> >> When we agree on the flyer text I can put it up on the website.
> >>
> >> Jon
> >>
> >> On Sun, 2009-03-15 at 08:43 -0700, Gwyfyn wrote:
> >>> I think Sky had a point re URL's, have we got ours on there?
> >>>
> >>> Maybe that would lead people to links etc anyways.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> PS Can some one send this to the right ppl:
> >>>
> >>> Dear G20 ppl/ Website bods.
> >>>
> >>> We will need a critique of Carbon Trading on the website somewhere.
> >>>
> >>> I have not checked yet. But will be able to shortly after I have gotten
> >>> some fresh air.
> >>>
> >>> M x
> >>>
> >>>> hi All,
> >>>>
> >>>> Okay i have just stuck Danny's & Jess's text in very quickly, because
> >>>> if I
> >>>> dont get outside today I might start to rot. I will fix it tonight (as
> >>>> it
> >>>> doesnt work anymore in terms of design).
> >>>>
> >>>> We might be able to get agreement to send it to print tomorrow- in
> >>>> which
> >>>> case we will have it for next weekend. Otherwise, we have until next
> >>>> Monday
> >>>> to fix it - and we will get it Friday the 27th.
> >>>>
> >>>> I am really attached to the 'Age of Oil' , but i have changed it. Are
> >>>> people
> >>>> sure it is better?
> >>>>
> >>>> jody
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > James Holland
> >
> > http://risingclevel.blogspot.com/
> >
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Cc-webedit mailing list
> Cc-webedit at lists.aktivix.org
> https://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-webedit