Monday, August 13, 2012

[285] The Big Green - Especulando con el Carbono

El buzzword es sustentabilidad.  El lenguaje es reducir las emisiones de Carbono.  Guardar un futuro verde para nuestros ni/nos.  Hell!  Hasta mi compa/nia esta involucrada en esto.  Pero hacer todo un mercado especulativo basado en toneladas equivalentes de carbono es la solucion?  No es tan simple, y es un asunto altamente debatido como presento en los links debajo:

Ese debate ha intensificado en las Olimpiadas de Londres del 2012, una de las primeras en incorporar todo este juego de LEED certifications, reduccion de huellas de carbono y el carbon offsetting voluntario de la gente que viajo a los juegos.

Si se fijan esto va mucho mas alla de los bistromatics locales sobre cuanto cuesta una medalla o cuanto debe invertirse en nuestros atletas.  Tampoco es si se esta mejor celebrando las medallas de la Gran Nacion o si nos conformamos con ser chiquitos pero con mi Nacion, sin pitiyanquis.
Numbers written on restaurant checks within the confines of restaurants do not follow the same mathematical laws as numbers written on any other pieces of paper in any other parts of the Universe. This single statement took the scientific world by storm. It completely revolutionized it. So many mathematical conferences got held in such good restaurants that many of the finest minds of a generation died of obesity and heart failure and the science of math was put back by years. Slowly, however, the implications of the idea began to be understood. to begin with it had been too stark, too crazy, too much like what the man in the street would have said "Oh, yes, I could have told you that."
Es estupido cuestionar la inversion que se hace en las federaciones de deporte en la Isla cuando se derrocha infinidad de dinero en trivialidades y cosas banales.  Acaso se hizo un estudio viable de cuanto se subsidio para traer a la furia roja o a yanni a la Isla?

El deporte es necesario en la Isla...sin embargo seguimos recortando los programas.

De nuevo al tema.  Londres 2012 fue dise/nado desde sus inicios con la sustentabilidad en mente.  Y lograron buenos numeros y buena publicidad para los auspiciadores.  Ejemplos:
The event’s carbon footprint is now projected to be the equivalent of 315,000 metric tons of CO2, down 21 percent from the 400,000 metric tons estimated in March, according to a report released by the London Organizing Committee of the Olympic Games, seen by Businessweek.
London pledged to put sustainability at the heart of the games when it won the bid to host the Olympics seven years ago. While the organizers have met targets for waste recycling and reuse, they’ve struggled to achieve goals for renewable-energy output and power consumption, and in 2009 ended a plan to offset emissions from the games by investing in clean energy abroad.
The bulk of the emission reductions detailed in today’s report stem from a decision to rent temporary seating, barriers and other infrastructure rather than buy them new. The organizers also cut 90,000 square meters (969,000 square feet) of floor space in venues, saving 15,000 tons of CO2, they said.
Energy use in venues “proved to be particularly challenging,” the committee said in the report. “London 2012 has managed to find alternative solutions that ultimately are leading to better outcomes in terms of carbon reductions, even if not by the original means envisaged.”

Waste Targets

The Olympic Delivery Authority, responsible for building the venues, reused or recycled more than 98 percent of the waste from demolishing warehouses and other structures already on the games site, beating a 90 percent target. About 99 percent of the waste created when building the venues was reused or recycled.
The Olympic Park will get about 11 percent of its energy from renewable sources including solar panels, biomass boilers and small wind turbines, the committee said. The original 20 percent target was stymied in 2010 when organizers canceled plans for a 2-megawatt wind turbine at the site.

Suena bonito, pero se trae el problema del Carbon Offsetting.  Contamino aqui y te pago una mitigacion para restaurar en otro lado.  No busca reducir o eliminar mis emisiones.
Since no industrial operation can ever be entirely emissions-free, the term is largely synonymous with carbon offsetting - when an organisation funds an environmental scheme, generally in a developing nation, to counteract the emissions resulting from its operations. Over the past few years, however, offsetting has attracted a growing number of critics who say that pay-to-pollute schemes have little real impact on emissions levels and fail to discourage rich nations from cleaning up their acts.

"Offsetting is a false solution," says Robin Webster of environmental lobby group Friends of the Earth. "The focus needs to be on emissions reduction, both in the UK and abroad, rather than playing one country off another." Such criticisms have spurred demand for certified offsets, which demonstrate that real emissions reductions have taken place. One of the most widely recognised certification is the Gold Standard.
Mas transfondo del tema aqui:

Los criticos del sistema dicen que hacer la energia verde un mercado especulativo donde se canjean toneladas de carbono es una receta de corrupcion:
‘Green grabbing’ – the rapidly-growing appropriation of land and resources in the name of ‘green ‘ biofuels, carbon offsetting schemes, conservation efforts and eco-tourism initiatives – is forcing people from their homelands and increasing poverty, new research has found.

Ecosystems being ‘asset-stripped’ for profit is likely to cause dispossession and further poverty amongst already-poor land and resource users, according to a set of 17 new research case studies from Africa, Asia and Latin America, published in a special issue of the Journal of Peasant Studies.
“Green grabs are the dark side of the green economy,” said Professor Melissa Leach, director of the ESRC STEPS Centre. “If market-based mechanisms are to contribute to sustainable development and the building of economies that are not only green but also fair, then fostering an agenda focused on distribution, equity and justice in green market arrangements is vital.”
This means including meaningful local engagement and consultation based on transparency, accountability and free, prior informed consent. Yet green markets cannot do it all. In the rush to repair a damaged nature through trading and offset schemes, the political-economic structures that caused the damage in the first place must not be neglected.
We continue to receive many reports from people who have been approached by firms promoting carbon credits in the UK. Find out why you should be wary about investing in the carbon credit market.
Carbon credits can be sold and traded legitimately and there are many reputable firms operating in the sector.
However, we are concerned that an increasing number of firms are using dubious, high-pressure sales tactics and targeting vulnerable consumers.
A carbon credit is a certificate or permit which represents the right to emit one tonne of carbon dioxide (CO2) and they can be traded for money.
There are two categories of carbon credits: voluntary emission reductions (VERs) and certified emission reductions (CERs). We believe VERs certificates are increasingly being offered to UK investors.
You can find out more about the different types of carbon credits and how the market developed in information we published in 2011.

How it works

Investors are usually called out of the blue by salespeople promoting carbon credits, but contact can also come by email, post, word of mouth or at a seminar or exhibition.
You may be offered carbon credit certificates, or an opportunity to invest directly in a ’green‘ scheme or project that generates carbon credits as a return on your investment.
The caller may claim carbon credits are ‘the new big thing’ in commodity trading, industries now have to off-set their emissions, the government is focusing on green developments or that it is an ever growing market.
You could lose money on your investment by not being able to sell, or at least get a competitive rate, when trading a small volume of carbon credits.

Interesante lectura:

Foto de:

Pero mi compa/nia si trabajo en la calculadora de emisiones.  Muy interesante el desarrollo del tema.  Algo aqui:
ERM has helped to develop a carbon offset calculator for BP and the London Olympics 2012 in addition to calculating the carbon footprint of some of the UK’s leading athletes.
ERM is playing its part in supporting carbon neutral travel to and from the 2012 Olympics following a high profile project for BP’s not-for-profit carbon offsetting scheme BP Target Neutral*.
We have worked with BP to develop the Olympics’ Spectators journey emissions calculator for BP Target Neutral. This work is part of BP’s Olympic 2012 sponsorship.
The calculator aims to create awareness of the environmental impact of journeys, and invites ticketholders to sign up to have their travel carbon footprint offset at no cost to themselves. You can access the calculator at:

Pueden correr la calculadora desde la pagina de BP:

En fin, el modelo deberia seguirse para ir mejorando las cosas y crear conciencia.  Estoy de acuerdo que estos grandes eventos tienen un gigantesco impacto ambiental.  Lo que haria sentido es que esos sitios, estadios y sistemas quedasen funcionando.  Como nuestra Villa Panamericana (la implotamos), o todos nuestros estadios deportivos que pasan al olvido luego de cumplir su funcion.

Asi que como veremos estos esquemas de aqui a cinco a/nos...como una solucion verde o como una nueva excusa para pillaje y corrupcion?  Me duele admitirlo pero creo que la segunda...

No comments:

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...