A recent report published by the WWF questions the financial additionality of up to 20% of the current Clean Development Mechanism projects. They claim that these projects would have happened regardless of financial incentives offered by the sale of CERs. Their argument is that these projects would have happened anyway...
I'm not convinced. The normal course of business is to maximize profits and minimize costs. To expect companies, especially high growth companies here in India, to invest money on reducing emissions with no financial incentive is...naive. The reality of the situation is that yes, these projects probably would have happened anyway. And yes, these projects in some places reap windfall profits for both the CER seller and buyer. But the question is 'when would they have happened?'
And for me there lies the additionality of many of these questionable credits. It isn't financial and it isn't environmental, it is the potential to make money, and for many of us in the development field that is somehow 'immoral'. But the question we have to answer is 'does the end justify the means?'
Maybe. Maybe not. But for the moment I have to believe that action is more important than inaction. Yes there is going to be more pollution in developed countries and yes we are in some ways letting polluters off-the-hook. I am aware of all these arguments and personally I agree...but at the moment taking the moral high ground isn't going to stop polluters from polluting.
0 comments:
Post a Comment