145
6
permitted to continue to burn coal with large emissions of CO 2 . The money might
go to a company that has established a large windmill park in Mexico.
From one perspective, carbon trade is seen as a way of reducing global warming that, at the same time, is beneficial to all involved actors. From another perspective, carbon trade is considered a way to justify continuous carbon emissions from
wealthy actors, and with negative impacts on temporal as well as spatial climate
justice.
Carbon trade is based on the establishing of new types of markets where buyers
and sellers can link up through specialist brokers. Governments specify legal conditions for carbon trade, and consultancy companies are involved in validations of
various aspects related to the trade. Either the buyers pay to get formal rights to
emit climate gases, or they buy carbon credits on a voluntary market to make up
for their carbon emissions. Sellers, on the other hand, receive payments to carry out
efforts to reduce climate emissions. The ‘commodity’ is measured in tons of CO 2
equivalents. As a simplification, some call the emission ‘carbon’ and the trade ‘carbon trade’. A document must be made specifying how many tons of CO 2 equivalents are involved in a particular trade. One ton of CO 2 equivalents involved in
such a trade is called a carbon credit.
Since climate change entered the political agenda in Norway in the beginning of
the 1990s, governments on both the left and the right side have established and
implemented a climate policy that places a substantial portion of climate cuts outside Norway’s borders. So far in this chapter, we have first of all focused on REDD
with its forest conservation in tropical countries as a key element of this approach.
Carbon trade is a different element, but it is also sometimes connected to
REDD. Both REDD and the carbon trade have been presented as cost-effective for
Norway. Furthermore, an important intention by some of the actors behind
REDD has been that carbon trade will finance REDD activities.
One may distinguish between three types of carbon trade. First, there are voluntary markets for carbon credits. In the REDD project in Kondoa, the stated
purpose was to prepare for participation in carbon markets, and AWF aimed for
voluntary markets. The intention was that the emission reductions should create
local income, and thereby secure continued forest conservation after the end of the
project. However, AWF did not manage to obtain a required certification. Such
certification is a process led by specialist companies. The process may be long and
expensive, and many criteria have to be met.
Buyers in voluntary markets consist of companies, governments and private
individuals such as business travellers or tourists on holiday. They all want to ‘offset’ carbon, implying that they see their purchase of carbon credits as funding the
mitigation of their own contributions to global warming. For instance, a return
flight for a German tourist in Thailand is about 2.5 CO 2 equivalents, according to
the carbon calculator of Carbon Footprint Ltd. A traveller can ‘offset’ this emission by buying 2.5 carbon credits. A number of companies have during the last few
years arrived on the scene to sell such carbon credits. They take payments from
travellers, pay a supplier of climate mitigation, and of course, charge a commission
for themselves.
6.7 · Three Types of Carbon Trade
6
permitted to continue to burn coal with large emissions of CO 2 . The money might
go to a company that has established a large windmill park in Mexico.
From one perspective, carbon trade is seen as a way of reducing global warming that, at the same time, is beneficial to all involved actors. From another perspective, carbon trade is considered a way to justify continuous carbon emissions from
wealthy actors, and with negative impacts on temporal as well as spatial climate
justice.
Carbon trade is based on the establishing of new types of markets where buyers
and sellers can link up through specialist brokers. Governments specify legal conditions for carbon trade, and consultancy companies are involved in validations of
various aspects related to the trade. Either the buyers pay to get formal rights to
emit climate gases, or they buy carbon credits on a voluntary market to make up
for their carbon emissions. Sellers, on the other hand, receive payments to carry out
efforts to reduce climate emissions. The ‘commodity’ is measured in tons of CO 2
equivalents. As a simplification, some call the emission ‘carbon’ and the trade ‘carbon trade’. A document must be made specifying how many tons of CO 2 equivalents are involved in a particular trade. One ton of CO 2 equivalents involved in
such a trade is called a carbon credit.
Since climate change entered the political agenda in Norway in the beginning of
the 1990s, governments on both the left and the right side have established and
implemented a climate policy that places a substantial portion of climate cuts outside Norway’s borders. So far in this chapter, we have first of all focused on REDD
with its forest conservation in tropical countries as a key element of this approach.
Carbon trade is a different element, but it is also sometimes connected to
REDD. Both REDD and the carbon trade have been presented as cost-effective for
Norway. Furthermore, an important intention by some of the actors behind
REDD has been that carbon trade will finance REDD activities.
One may distinguish between three types of carbon trade. First, there are voluntary markets for carbon credits. In the REDD project in Kondoa, the stated
purpose was to prepare for participation in carbon markets, and AWF aimed for
voluntary markets. The intention was that the emission reductions should create
local income, and thereby secure continued forest conservation after the end of the
project. However, AWF did not manage to obtain a required certification. Such
certification is a process led by specialist companies. The process may be long and
expensive, and many criteria have to be met.
Buyers in voluntary markets consist of companies, governments and private
individuals such as business travellers or tourists on holiday. They all want to ‘offset’ carbon, implying that they see their purchase of carbon credits as funding the
mitigation of their own contributions to global warming. For instance, a return
flight for a German tourist in Thailand is about 2.5 CO 2 equivalents, according to
the carbon calculator of Carbon Footprint Ltd. A traveller can ‘offset’ this emission by buying 2.5 carbon credits. A number of companies have during the last few
years arrived on the scene to sell such carbon credits. They take payments from
travellers, pay a supplier of climate mitigation, and of course, charge a commission
for themselves.
6.7 · Three Types of Carbon Trade