Notes on Sustainability

S: Today we are talking with Bridget McIntosh, Founder of Carbon Bridge Pte Ltd, a carbon asset advisory company in the Asia Pacific specializing in the Mekong region.

BM:  Thanks Steve.  Nice to be here.

S: Many of the readers of this blog will not be familiar with the Kyoto Protocol and what it aims to do. Could you give us a short explanation and a good reference to more info

BM:  The Kyoto Protocol is a worldwide agreement to cut greenhouse gas emissions – those countries who have ratified Kyoto agreed to cut their emissions on average by around 5% below their emissions in 1990. Developing countries do not have targets as their share (and hence responsibility) of the world’s accumulated emissions is significantly lower than industrialized countries who’s development has benefited from the combustion of fossil fuels.  Under Kyoto, developing countries can create and sell emission reduction credits to developed countries who can use it to meet their targets.  This is what the CDM is all about.  Kyoto is only a first step, and certainly not sufficient to avoid serious changes to our climate.  But it’s a start.

S: Thanks for that, I personally find the carbon industry quite confusing and illogical, but you know this already.  Going into 2012, when the Kyoto protocol ends, what do you think will happen.

BM:  I sincerely hope that we can have a worldwide agreement so we can work towards stabilizing emissions in our atmosphere to 450ppm.  That will mean developed countries need to commit to reducing emissions between 25-40%.  UK and Europe have committed something similar, but only if other countries also commit to high levels of reductions.  What do I think will happen? What will we get? Not that! So hopefully an agreement to cut emission by only 20%; with some of the more industrialized developing countries taking on commitments.  This may be through a sectoral approach, where polluting industries such as cement, aluminum, iron etc worldwide face a common benchmark regardless of the location – countries that go below that are able to trade emissions.  This helps to address some of the concerns of shifting industries offshore to countries without targets and helps keep industries competitive.  It’s such a shame that Obama didn’t appear on the scene at the last election  …

S: Given that so much money has been deployed to “trade carbon”, it is unlikely that this industry wil simply disappear in 2013.  What do you think will happen….Do you think VERs (Voluntary Emission reductions) will become the de facto standard in the absence of international resolve?

BM:  Yes, a lot of investment has been deployed into projects that reduce greenhouse emissions as a result of the Kyoto Protocol and the trade of carbon to countries /companies using CERs to meet their targets.  The CDM and hence CERs has a mandate to continue post 2013, however the question is whether there will be demand for such CERs and this demand will depend on the agreements reached post 2012. if there are no international agreements to cut emissions, then governments and countries may choose to set targets alone and define which standards they will accept.  The CDM may be one of those standard, or others such as the Voluntary Carbon Standards (VCS).  Whichever it is, the fundamentals for proving projects conduct real and measurable and verified reductions is necessary.  Already the EU have set such targets under their EU ETS (Emissions Trading Scheme), that mandate reductions with our without an international agreement, and allows the use of CERs.

S: the media seems to be focused on the trading of carbon and the impacts of climate change. They seem to be ignoring the actual physical work of stopping emissions.  Do you think this will change?  There seems tobe a bigger role for media here. Have you been interviewed for TV programs for instance???  I dont really have the face for television….

BM:  <<laughs a little too hard >>. But seriously, understanding the impacts of climate change is important if we’re going to mobilize and action and do something about it. Focusing on trading carbon per se is not so bad, but it really should always link back to the project reducing emissions, rather on the movement of credits.

S: I get the feeling that the world is still in denial about climate change.  You are out there doing your bit.  What do you think people can do from a personal view point to make an impact?

BM:  educate themselves of the seriousness of climate change (so it becomes real, and not just a word that people ‘harp on about’).  To take action on an individual level, we all need to be more energy efficient; the basics at home like using efficient showerheads, light bulbs, washing machines, fridges etc; using public transport or avoid car trips with 1 person; offset unavoidable emissions.  On a macro level, we need to call our governments to account – get them to the international table to reach a real target; do more to encourage renewable energy and energy efficiency; to address the imbalance in support for the fossil fuel industry; support research and infrastructure around new technologies.

S: If you had threee wishes…what would you do to change the climate change equation?

BM:  Wish 1 – use the global economic restructuring that will come out of the GFC to create sustainable economies that address the risks of climate change and redefines our energy use and dependence on fossil fuels.

Wish 2 – all countries quit their bickering and come to the table to agree to curb greenhouse emissions by 450ppm by 2020

Wish 3 – we come up with an effective mechanism to avoid worldwide deforestation, a mechanism that somehow addresses the realities of the forestry industry (fun and games) in developing countries.  Cutting forests is a double whammy – it releases stored emissions, and it takes away the very mechanism – photosynthesis – that helps us pull CO2 out of our atmosphere.

Really I’d like to find a way where we can all live in this world sustainably, so that my baby Nina can enjoy the wonders of this earth as much as we have … and without fear of natural resource wars