Climate 411

How Brazil can develop its rural economy, increase agricultural production and protect forests

Day one panel “How should the rural economy be in the future?” featuring, from left, Carlos Nobre (IEA-USP), André Guimarães (IPAM), Regina Sambuichi (Ipea), and Juliano Assunção (PUC-RIO). Photo by IPC-IG on Flickr .

The recent fires in the Amazon rainforest have raised the question: is it possible to have a new model of development in the region that reconciles forest protection with economic growth?

The pressing threats of climate change, biodiversity loss, and environmental degradation along with a growing global demand for agricultural commodities, pose major challenges and opportunities for rural economies.

A group of Brazilian and international scientists, economists, and government officials joined private sector, civil society and multilateral organization representatives in Brasília to discuss how these challenges could be turned into economic and environmental opportunities for the Brazilian rural sector.

The two day workshop, “Business Opportunities for a Sustainable Rural Economy: The Contribution from Forests and Agriculture,” examined different facets of Brazil’s potential in a low-carbon rural economy. Organized by Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) in partnership with the Institute for Applied Economic Research (Ipea) of the Brazilian Ministry of Economy, and the United Nations Development Program – International Policy Centre for Inclusive Growth (IPC-IG), participants concluded that Brazil has an unparalleled comparative advantage to foster a buoyant sustainable rural economy that couples economic and agricultural development with environmental protection.

Read More »

Also posted in Agriculture, Brazil, Forest protection / Read 1 Response

Study: Consumers willing to pay carbon offsets for air travel

New social science research finds people are willing to put a price on carbon; just don’t ask them to pay taxes

iStock

This post was authored by Rainer Romero-Canyas, Lead Senior Social Scientist for EDF.

Flying shame has gone mainstream—just ask the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. But are travelers who won’t face the wrath of the tabloids for flying willing to chip in to offset the cost of flying on the environment? A new study from the University of British Columbia and EDF suggests they are. It all depends on how it’s labeled and who is viewed as paying for the environmental impact of the flight.

We wanted to see if it was possible to introduce policy instruments designed to price carbon, without triggering an aversion to taxes, a common challenge in the United States. So, we tested two aspects of the fee: one, both how it was labeled (a carbon offset or a carbon tax), and two, if it was important to see who got the bill (the company that imports or processes fossil fuel or the consumers who use their products and services).

In an upcoming issue of the Journal of Environmental Psychology, my co-authors and I detail the results of three studies focused primarily on the airline industry, because its emissions are slated to triple in the coming decades, absent policy change, making it one of the fastest sources of carbon pollution worldwide. The good news: consumers are willing to pay more for flying responsibly, just as long as it’s the airlines they’re flying that are stepping up and shouldering that responsibility.

Read More »

Also posted in Aviation, Science / Read 2 Responses

California-Quebec August auction clears after emissions below 2020 target for second year running

Wind farm in San Gorgonio Pass, California.

Wind farm in San Gorgonio Pass, California. Photo: Pxhere.com

This post was co-authored by Katelyn Roedner Sutter

Results of the August 2019 California-Quebec carbon allowance auction were released today, and demonstrate that a strong and steady market is the status quo. These results come just weeks after the Newsom administration’s announcement that in 2017 the state’s total emissions were below the 2020 target for the second year in a row.

Today’s results in brief:

  • All 66,289,515 current allowances sold, clearing at $17.16, $1.54 above the floor price of $15.62. This is $0.29 below the May 2019 clearing price of $17.45. As in the last auction, no previously unsold allowances were offered from California.
  • All of the 9,038,000 future vintage allowances offered also sold at $16.85, $1.23 above the $15.62 floor price. These allowances are not available for use until 2022, demonstrating strong confidence in future market performance.
  • The auction raised approximately $ 729 million USD for the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, which allows California to invest in programs to improve local air quality and reduce emissions from buildings, agriculture and transportation.
  • Quebec raised over approximately $ 248.75 million CAD (approximately $ 187 million USD), which funds local climate investments in the province.

These results demonstrate a couple of notable trends:  Read More »

Also posted in California, Cities and states, Greenhouse Gas Emissions / Read 2 Responses

California releases updated Tropical Forest Standard: Here are the highlights and why CARB should endorse it

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) this week released an updated version of the proposed Tropical Forest Standard (TFS) for consideration at its September 19 Board meeting. CARB made some important changes to the TFS in response to feedback from members of the California Assembly, indigenous leaders, environmental groups, environmental justice advocates, and subject-matter experts.

Endorsement of the TFS would value tropical forests for the extensive climate benefits they provide. It would also be a major step forward for tropical forests and the communities who live in and defend them. And these proposed changes would make the TFS even stronger in the fight against tropical deforestation.

In general, the changes CARB has made – responding to public and policymaker feedback – add detail and clarity that strengthen the accountability built into the TFS. The more specificity, the easier it is to ensure the standard is upheld and ultimately helps deliver the emission reductions from stopping tropical deforestation that the climate so desperately needs.

Here are the key changes to the proposal. (A Tropical Forest Standard refresher may be helpful before diving in.)

Read More »

Also posted in California, Forest protection, Indigenous People / Read 1 Response

The Status Quo is not an Option for Oregon or the Planet

Authored by Erica Morehouse, Senior Attorney, U.S. Climate Policy and Analysis

Oregon is the current bellwether for climate action in the United States thanks to its effort to place an ambitious, firm limit on all major sources of climate pollution in the state.  HB 2020, Oregon’s “Cap and Invest” bill has passed three major legislative hurdles this year and has the final and most challenging – passage in the state Senate – left to clear before the end of session on June 30.  We are expecting a vote today.

The status quo is not an option

Oregon is already seeing the devastating effects of climate change; the question is only how much worse it is going to get before we transition to the clean economy we need. It’s time to be honest with ourselves, the status quo is not an option.  HB 2020 lays out a solution to address climate pollution while providing a smooth transition for Oregonians directly impacted by this bold initiative. These features include assistance for low-income Oregonians, investments in worker transition programs, compliance cost reductions for many manufacturers designed to protect jobs, and a novel investment set aside for tribes.

The two most critical components of Oregon’s policy

In the final weeks of Oregon’s legislative session, opponents tried and failed to make amendments to the bill that would have gutted the core of what makes Oregon’s effort so ambitious and critical—and a true model for other states to follow: the interim 2035 target and Day 1 coverage of the transportation sector.

  • The 2035 interim target ensures reductions over the next decade on the timescale that science demands. The IPCC report tells us we have just over a decade to significantly reduce climate pollution and avoid the most catastrophic effects of climate change. Setting ambitious targets for the 2030s is essential for getting reductions on track now, and achieving the critical early emission reductions people and the planet need. Also, having an ambitious target in the 2030s is almost certainly a non-negotiable prerequisite for linking with the California-Quebec WCI market – a stated priority for the architects of Oregon’s policy. Moreover, this level of ambition is consistent with Colorado’s recently passed statutory requirement to reduce statewide greenhouse gas emissions 50% below 2005 levels by 2030.
  • Coverage of the transportation sector means the largest source of Oregon’s pollution is included. Exempting the rising emissions of this sector means smaller industries would have to do even more to reduce emissions to meet Oregon’s goals, while giving the biggest polluters a free pass. Without the transportation sector in the program from day one, Cap and Invest will not have the power or reach to drive the transformational change that we literally cannot live without.

Climate action under attack

After failing to push their disastrous amendments, opponents are now set on undermining this bill altogether and are asking legislators to vote “no”.  Leading the charge against HB 2020 are Boeing and AAA.  AAA claims to be the travelers “most trusted advocate”, but it is unlikely that their members across Oregon who rely on them for towing services and roadside assistance understand that they are working actively in Salem to undermine an effort to get cleaner cars on the road and to diversify transportation options for Oregonians. Boeing’s opposition is also particularly hard to understand.  Final amendments to the bill put Boeing in the enviable position of being guaranteed valuable free allowances for their facility in Gresham that will significantly, if not completely, reduce costs the company might have seen from the program while creating a critical market-based incentive to improve efficiency and reduce emissions associated with their production practices while protecting incentives to increase output.  Yet, the company is lobbying against climate policy that is in line with corporate sustainability commitments they have already made.  Many companies have taken on ambitious voluntary, climate commitments and vocally supported climate action including in Oregon. Companies that are stuck in the past and insist on obfuscating, misleading, and outright obstructing to derail climate action should be held accountable.

A diverse coalition of stakeholders reflects a fine-tuned policy

As demoralizing as myopic opposition can be, Oregon has a winning coalition that can provide lessons on how to win on climate in the U.S. and around the world:

  • Legislative leaders and Governor Kate Brown have provided their full throated support for Cap and Invest for well over a year and have been diligently putting the pieces in place to pass a policy that can deliver the environmental outcomes the climate needs while ensuring the provisions are carefully tailored for Oregon communities.
  • Local environmental, environmental justice, and health leaders have been working hard for the better part of a decade to pass companion legislation and lay the groundwork for such an overarching policy like HB2020 that will provide the certainty around pollution outcomes and harness the power of the market to drive investment and innovation in clean technologies.
  • Over 100 forward-looking businesses, including major companies like Nike and Uber, have been supporting the policy through several legislative iterations.
  • Major electric and gas utilities—those that power and heat Oregon’s homes and businesses—are supporting the legislation, including Portland General Electric, Pacific Power, and Northwest Natural, citing key consumer-protection provisions.
  • Oregon’s Native American tribes have played a critical role in developing and advocating for the policy and have secured a novel set aside from carbon revenue that will directly benefit tribes.
  • Key labor unions such as the building trades also support Cap and Invest, after securing the inclusion of prevailing wage provisions.

Time for the Senate To Act

Oregon has all of the ingredients for success, but the political fight is still a bitter one. HB2020 will create tangible benefits for Oregonians and the state’s economy—while laying out a clear policy template for other states who are now committing to strong reduction targets but don’t yet have the regulations or policies in place to actually achieve the reductions in climate pollution that we know are necessary. It’s imperative that Oregon shows the way toward a real solution that can drive action now— and such a framework will not only chart a path for other states, but provide a real roadmap for future federal action.

Also posted in Climate Change Legislation, Economics, News / Comments are closed

Carbon markets: Can countries fill in the missing chapter of the Paris rulebook in Bonn?

https://www.flickr.com/photos/unfccc/48078728413/in/album-72157709079202332/

Bonn Climate Change Conference opening plenary. UNclimatechange

Negotiators are meeting in Bonn, Germany this week and next on the back of the successful negotiations in Katowice, Poland where the Paris climate agreement “rulebook” was mostly agreed, on time. A feat nearly unprecedented in the often glacial UN climate talks provides hope that countries can continue to work together in light of the urgency to address climate change.

The one exception to the success in Katowice was international cooperation through carbon markets. Despite taking the session into overtime, negotiators could not agree on a key chapter of that rulebook – the text meant to catalyze international cooperation on carbon markets under Article 6.

Among other things, Article 6 guidance will spell out how countries can “count” the results of international emissions reduction trading toward their Paris greenhouse gas reduction pledges (known as nationally determined contributions, or NDCs). Article 6 has three main components framing international cooperation under the Paris Agreement. Article 6.2 provides for the accounting framework, Article 6.4 establishes a new UNFCCC mechanism and Article 6.8 provides a framework for non-market approaches.

As one of the last items that need to be addressed after COP24, carbon markets will be a central focus of the negotiations in 2019 and Article 6 will benefit from additional political focus on the road to agreement at COP25 in Santiago de Chile in December.

Here we answer key questions about carbon markets and the UN climate talks.  Read More »

Also posted in International, Paris Agreement, United Nations / Comments are closed