|
contents: background
info: The logo story. Why Eyeforenergy doesn't want a parody of their logo on the web and why A SEED thinks they aren't as 'unbiased' as they say. |
Action on Eyeforenergy Corporate Carbon trading-event Amsterdam, February 19. This morning 17 activists of the action group ARK disturbed the opening of the Eye-for-Energy conference about emission trading in the Okura Hotel. Armed with water pistols, blue wigs and "farting-gas" they tried to emphasize that Carbon trading "stinks" and the hunt for profits by TNC's is not a solution to counter global climate change. The demand of the occupying people was an immediate 60% reduction of the emission of greenhouse gases in line with the UN scientists' own recommendations. The conference was delayed for about two hours and in the end thirteen people got arrested, among them the five people that were in very innovative ankle-lock-ons. (Yes Mr. Police-officer, four people walked out without you noticing it!!!). At 6 pm tonight the thirteen will be officially taken into police-custody on the charge of assault, causing damage and entering private property without permission (right now they are only "arrested"). Later tonight there will be a solidarity-noise demonstration in front of the police station were they are held. Outside a group of about 60 people, joined by quite an impressive amount of press, did street theatre, played samba, distributed leaflets to by-passers and delegates. While rain, hail and freezing cold wind (the "climate") was attacking them, they stood and played there for four hours, showing solidarity with the people inside and their drums being clearly heard inside the hotel. Absolute eye-catchers were the "corporate bastard" on stilts and two clowns. Also two little girls with their parents joined us in our festive protest and even endeared the police officers. About the conference During the three-day Eye-for-Energy conference, corporations will discuss the implementation of emissions trading as well energy and weather trading. A number of companies are hoping to earn big money by trading emission rights of greenhouse gases. We believe that the main cause for the growing interest for these environmental issues is the fear of further regulations. Politicians and people are encouraged to believe that the 'voluntary action' of companies is sufficient to tackle the problems of global warming. This image-building is also referred to as greenwashing. Emission trade is an attempt to translate pollution into money. If the rules of the current economy are applied to our climate, then the victims will be the environment and the peoples of developing nations. The conference
was (will be) opened by Mark Akhurst,'Manager Climate Change' of
BP, with a speech on the successes of this oil corporation. British
Petroleum is presenting itself as the great saviour of the environment.
However the fact that their greenwash PR budget is bigger than their
On Carbon Trading It is claimed that emission trading will create funding for alternative energy projects, but funding for clean energy and other useful technological developments can just as well be gained in other ways. The problem with emission trading is that it does not ensure a reduction in CO2 emissions. It does not alter the present neo-liberal economic system that is responsible for the over-consumption and the eternal urge for growth in western countries is not questioned. The same corporations that are largely responsible for climate change, social problems and other ecological problems, are given more freedom to continue as usual. Possible
alternatives Direct action for direct democracy! (ARK) Amsterdamse
Radicale Klimaatactivisten Inside
report: ..for a
couple of hours! After the room was occupied by the locked-on protestors and declared a lost cause for the conference events, all potential carbon traders were moved into the lobby area, where they discussed the interruption to the otherwise, fairly dull morning.The day had begun with an unenthusiastic introduction from Point Carbon CEO, Kristian Tangen.The difficult part in these types of events is trying to follow what is an extremely technical subject, full to the brim with assumptions of prior knowledge.However the numbers that Tangen threw at the audience soon pricked up a few ears.In 2002, Point Carbon estimate that the carbon market will be worth a mean average of $489 million USD.Six years before the actual international market formulated in the Kyoto Protocol is set to begin.Tangen described 2002 as “a very interesting year for carbon trading” with “unprecedented opportunities”. Then enter Mark Akhurst, BP’s head of climate change with his sets of facts and figures.Akhurst stated that his company had already achieved 5% reduction in CO2 emissions, half of their voluntary commitment to 10% reductions below 1990 levels.All this with the aid of emissions trading which made it cost effective to make such dramatic cuts.BP’s emissions trading scheme also managed to earn them $650 million USD in extra profits as most reductions were achieved through energy efficiency and reducing gas flaring.So, for BP, the solution to all our climate-related problems is to implement emissions trading schemes based on their model.And now they’ve had a few years to practice, they can be the Pied Piper of the market. Emissions trading may well be the Holy Grail of uniting business and the environment.But before leaping to that conclusion, a closer look a the idea and its propagators is needed. First the ‘pioneers’ of emission trading - BP. While BP champion themselves as a climate-friendly company, their continued membership in groups like the American Petroleum Institute throws some doubt to their greener than green claims.The API’s position in the UN climate talks has been one of "our actions in the next 10 or 15 years will have little impact on the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere in the year 2050 or 2100."So why are BP remodeling themselves as ‘Beyond Petroleum’ whilst supporting a lobby group with an anti-action position? Is there real concern for the environment at the core of the BP emissions trading scheme or a cynical attempt to cover all the angles, just in case? As well as make a tidy little profit in the process. As for emissions
trading itself, what became clear from the BP resentation was that
the business units involved in their internal scheme were self-monitoring.Akhurst
admitted that measuring reported emissions is “never 100% accurate”.There
is an obvious conflict of interest for players in the market buying
and selling carbon credits, while measuring their own emissions
and being responsible for the accounting involved.A case in point
is the recent scandal involving Enron energy trading company and Trading in emissions
is not just a business solution to climate change, it is the brainchild
of big corporations.Small businesses are remarkable by their absence
from both today’s conference and the history of the development
of emissions trading which has been pushed forward by large transnational Finally, and what was ignored by the carbon traders and only remembered by the activists, it will do nothing to challenge the might of the corporations who already have too much say in the decisions that affect the survival of the planet and its peoples. more on <www.risingtide.nl> Links to articles on other sites:
|
