Carbon-footprint labels are visual symbols of a brand’s solid commitment to reduce their impact on the environment and reduce their carbon footprint.According to an Article in The Economist (June 2, 2011), sections of which are available below, Carbon-footprint labels are quietly spreading. Consumers may not have noticed them yet, but there is a lot going on behind the scenes.
From a Southern perspective, carbon-foot printing could raise different questions: How far is this process useful to ‘integrate true Green House Gas Accounting’ directly into the foundation of the global economy? Who eventually meets the ‘carbon foot-print’ cost (consumer or producer)? Would this ‘effort’ have been diverted elsewhere or in another form, where more global benefits would accrue?
.....
The idea with carbon labels is to let shoppers identify products with the smallest carbon footprints, just as other labels already indicate dolphin-friendly tuna, organic milk or Fairtrade coffee. Producers would compete to reduce the carbon footprints of their products, and consumers would be able to tell whether, for example, locally made goods really were greener than imported ones.
Carbon labels have yet to become as widely recognised by consumers as other eco-labels, however. A survey carried out in 2010 by a British consumer group, found that just a fifth of British shoppers recognised the carbon footprint label, compared with recognition rates of 82% for Fairtrade and 54% for organic labelling. This is understandable, because carbon labelling is a much more recent development—organic labelling dates back to the 1970s, and Fairtrade to the late 1980s—and the right ways to do it are still being worked out. Adding a carbon label to a product is a complex and often costly process that involves tracing its ingredients back up their respective supply chains and through their manufacturing processes, to work out their associated emissions. According to 3M, an American industrial giant that makes over 55,000 different products, this can cost $30,000 for a single product. To further confuse matters, different carbon footprinting and labelling standards have emerged in different countries, preventing direct comparisons between the various types of label.
The value of carbon footprinting and labelling lies in identifying these sorts of savings, rather than informing consumers or making companies look green. According to a report issued in 2009 by the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research at the University of Manchester, in England, “the main benefits of carbon labelling are likely to be incurred not via communication of emissions values to consumers, but upstream via manufacturers looking for additional ways to reduce emissions.” It is not so much the label itself that matters, in other words, but the process that must be gone through to create it. Walkers has reduced the footprint of its crisps by 7% since the introduction of its first carbon labels. Indeed, to use the Carbon Trust’s label, companies must do more than just measure the footprint of a product: they must commit themselves to reducing it.
In France, a year-long experiment will begin in July, involving 168 firms in a range of industries, to apply carbon labels to products including clothing, furniture and cleaning products. An accompanying campaign will try to raise awareness of carbon labels among consumers. This is a prelude to the planned introduction of compulsory carbon-labelling rules, possibly as soon as 2012, which will apply to imported goods as well as those made in France. The new rules, devised by AFNOR, the French Standards Agency, require labels to show more than just the carbon footprint. Depending on the product category, they must also include other environmental data, such as the product’s water footprint and impact on biodiversity. Product-category rules have already been drawn up by AFNOR and the French environment ministry for shoes, wood, furniture, shampoo and fabric chairs. The project is the result of Grenelle 2, a law passed in 2010 which marks the first time a government has tried to make environmental labelling mandatory.
Read the full article
Thursday, June 16, 2011
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
The Climate and Development Knowledge Network seeks your views on green growth – join the debate
In an exclusive The Climate and Development Knowledge Network (CDKN) discussion series, Executive Chair Simon Maxwell is seeking your views on what green growth means for developing countries. Simon has put together ten propositions on green growth, and will be answering your questions and comments on two of these propositions each week for the next five weeks. Visit the CDKN website to read the paper in full.
....
The impact of climate change on growth, and the impact of growth on climate change, are much debated. Growth optimists argue that green growth options will make it possible for economies to expand, while preventing irreversible global warming. Growth pessimists say this is unachievable, adding that we consume too much, and should accept lower growth rates.
But from the perspective of developing countries, continued growth seems to be an imperative if the Millennium Development Goals are to be met. Developing country governments’ main concern is that measures taken to combat climate change might dampen growth prospects. Yet fast-growing developing economies are increasingly contributing to climate change: what should be done?
Much of the current debate focuses on mitigation and adaptation, important components of climate-related policy. At CDKN, we add a third dimension, development. Climate compatible development is development that minimises the harm caused by climate impacts, while maximising the many human development opportunities presented by a low- emissions, more resilient future.
....
The impact of climate change on growth, and the impact of growth on climate change, are much debated. Growth optimists argue that green growth options will make it possible for economies to expand, while preventing irreversible global warming. Growth pessimists say this is unachievable, adding that we consume too much, and should accept lower growth rates.
But from the perspective of developing countries, continued growth seems to be an imperative if the Millennium Development Goals are to be met. Developing country governments’ main concern is that measures taken to combat climate change might dampen growth prospects. Yet fast-growing developing economies are increasingly contributing to climate change: what should be done?
Much of the current debate focuses on mitigation and adaptation, important components of climate-related policy. At CDKN, we add a third dimension, development. Climate compatible development is development that minimises the harm caused by climate impacts, while maximising the many human development opportunities presented by a low- emissions, more resilient future.
Fuel-Efficient Stoves Protect Women’s Health and Forests
Regan Suzuki from the Center for People and Forests (RECOFTC) thinks focusing on something as small as a stove could make big changes for women in forests. If women were more deliberately considered in REDD+ and development projects, the significant potential of fuel-efficient stoves for improving their lives and reducing deforestation would make it a high priority.
When considering underlying drivers of deforestation, there is an important — and gendered — factor that gets far less attention than it should. Biomass plays an enormously important role in the lives of the rural poor in developing countries, serving as the primary source of energy for cooking and household heating. The collection of fuel wood is done primarily by women and children, with men’s involvement growing only when these activities are commercialized.
As forests reduce or become degraded, women and children need to spend increasing amounts of time collecting firewood, leaving little time for other activities such as study for girls. More
When considering underlying drivers of deforestation, there is an important — and gendered — factor that gets far less attention than it should. Biomass plays an enormously important role in the lives of the rural poor in developing countries, serving as the primary source of energy for cooking and household heating. The collection of fuel wood is done primarily by women and children, with men’s involvement growing only when these activities are commercialized.
As forests reduce or become degraded, women and children need to spend increasing amounts of time collecting firewood, leaving little time for other activities such as study for girls. More
Monday, June 13, 2011
Unregulated brick-making choking the environment
Joshua Zake in a letter to the Editor in Uganda's Monitor Newspaper, points at the challenge of brick-making a lucrative business in an economy that has a booming construction sector. To avert this, he mentions an existing technology that does not seem to be popularised yet. Other potential solutions like the 'bottle brick' also seem not to be taken up.
.................
With a population of about 31 million Ugandans, there is very high demand for housing facilities. This demand will continue because Uganda’s population is exploding. Construction is a fast-growing industry with a growth rate 13 per cent, thus responding to the high demand for housing given a housing deficit of 550,000 units.
Most houses are made from traditional bricks. These are cured bricks made from clay or arable soil. Brick-making is a lucrative business and hence creates employment opportunities. Cured bricks in Uganda cost about Shs200 each.
The high requirements for firewood in curing bricks and the associated scarcity of firewood has pushed some communities in Wakiso, Mukono, Yumbe, Arua and other parts of Uganda to use fruit trees such as mangoes and jack fruits. In Lukwanga, Wakiso District, brick layers are using arable land thinking brick-making is more lucrative than farming on depleted soils. This will advance food insecurity considering that all the arable land will be mined for brick-making.
This is worrying because the process of curing bricks is associated with loss of trees and forest. This has negative impact on the climate since it has an effect on rainfall patterns, resulting in droughts, crop failures, and limited access to firewood for household energy use.
There are modern, sustainable technologies for brick-making though underutilized. The Interlocking Stabilized Soil Blocks machine is a good option. In Uganda, since 1991, Dr Moses Musaazi, an engineer at Makerere University, developed a technique which, by mixing soil and cement and then compressing the dampened mixture, produces an interlocking block that is stronger and uniformly shaped than a conventional traditional brick.
With this technology, 35 bricks are produced every 8 hours, saves 10 tonnes of trees because firing is not required.
Unfortunately, there are weak initiatives by the national and local governments to regulate and control brick-making. At the national level, the Draft National Soils Policy (2002), one of the key policy instruments for regulating brick-making, has been in offing for the last 16 years.
Furthermore, there is limited education of brick layers about modern technologies that are more sustainable with minimum impacts on the environment. Awareness creation about the implication of unregulated brick-making should be advanced while demonstrating and supporting sustainable technologies for brick-making in Uganda.
.................
With a population of about 31 million Ugandans, there is very high demand for housing facilities. This demand will continue because Uganda’s population is exploding. Construction is a fast-growing industry with a growth rate 13 per cent, thus responding to the high demand for housing given a housing deficit of 550,000 units.
Most houses are made from traditional bricks. These are cured bricks made from clay or arable soil. Brick-making is a lucrative business and hence creates employment opportunities. Cured bricks in Uganda cost about Shs200 each.
The high requirements for firewood in curing bricks and the associated scarcity of firewood has pushed some communities in Wakiso, Mukono, Yumbe, Arua and other parts of Uganda to use fruit trees such as mangoes and jack fruits. In Lukwanga, Wakiso District, brick layers are using arable land thinking brick-making is more lucrative than farming on depleted soils. This will advance food insecurity considering that all the arable land will be mined for brick-making.
This is worrying because the process of curing bricks is associated with loss of trees and forest. This has negative impact on the climate since it has an effect on rainfall patterns, resulting in droughts, crop failures, and limited access to firewood for household energy use.
There are modern, sustainable technologies for brick-making though underutilized. The Interlocking Stabilized Soil Blocks machine is a good option. In Uganda, since 1991, Dr Moses Musaazi, an engineer at Makerere University, developed a technique which, by mixing soil and cement and then compressing the dampened mixture, produces an interlocking block that is stronger and uniformly shaped than a conventional traditional brick.
With this technology, 35 bricks are produced every 8 hours, saves 10 tonnes of trees because firing is not required.
Unfortunately, there are weak initiatives by the national and local governments to regulate and control brick-making. At the national level, the Draft National Soils Policy (2002), one of the key policy instruments for regulating brick-making, has been in offing for the last 16 years.
Furthermore, there is limited education of brick layers about modern technologies that are more sustainable with minimum impacts on the environment. Awareness creation about the implication of unregulated brick-making should be advanced while demonstrating and supporting sustainable technologies for brick-making in Uganda.
Monday, June 6, 2011
UN officials call for political will to put world on path to green economy
United Nations officials appealed for greater political will in both developed and developing countries to make the transition to the “green economy” for sustainable development to protect humanity from environmental disaster and economic ruin which might result from current dependence on non-renewable energy.
“Will we be able to evolve towards a green economy and sustainable development? Will we be able to stop destroying ourselves?,” asked Joseph Deiss, the President of the UN General Assembly in his remarks to the Assembly’s debate on the green economy.
Mr. Deiss stressed that while there is currently no internationally recognized definition of “green economy,” the term implied “decoupling economic growth from the use of fossil fuels and non-renewable energy sources.”
Outlining the measures that could encourage both producers and consumers to adopt environmentally-friendly behaviour, Mr. Deiss mentioned a broad range of approaches, including subsidies, environmental taxes and paying for pollution rights, while underlining the need to eliminate subsidies harmful to the environment, such as those that promote the use of fossil fuels.
“The green economy can take different forms, depending on the context of each country, its level of development, and its geographic location in particular,” said Mr. Deiss. “Some will begin by greening their transport infrastructure, others will prefer to promote ecotourism or organic agriculture,” he said.
He said adopting greener economic models would require structural changes, with job losses in certain sectors and gains in others.
Deputy Secretary-General Asha-Rose Migiro emphasized that the green economy must be adapted to specific national circumstances, with each country determining how it can work for its people and for the planet.
“For countries where poverty is rife, green economy measures must create abundant jobs and sustainable livelihoods. For countries that depend heavily on raw material exports, green economy measures must not displace vital economic sectors, but instead create dynamic new growth sectors,” she added.
Source
“Will we be able to evolve towards a green economy and sustainable development? Will we be able to stop destroying ourselves?,” asked Joseph Deiss, the President of the UN General Assembly in his remarks to the Assembly’s debate on the green economy.
Mr. Deiss stressed that while there is currently no internationally recognized definition of “green economy,” the term implied “decoupling economic growth from the use of fossil fuels and non-renewable energy sources.”
Outlining the measures that could encourage both producers and consumers to adopt environmentally-friendly behaviour, Mr. Deiss mentioned a broad range of approaches, including subsidies, environmental taxes and paying for pollution rights, while underlining the need to eliminate subsidies harmful to the environment, such as those that promote the use of fossil fuels.
“The green economy can take different forms, depending on the context of each country, its level of development, and its geographic location in particular,” said Mr. Deiss. “Some will begin by greening their transport infrastructure, others will prefer to promote ecotourism or organic agriculture,” he said.
He said adopting greener economic models would require structural changes, with job losses in certain sectors and gains in others.
Deputy Secretary-General Asha-Rose Migiro emphasized that the green economy must be adapted to specific national circumstances, with each country determining how it can work for its people and for the planet.
“For countries where poverty is rife, green economy measures must create abundant jobs and sustainable livelihoods. For countries that depend heavily on raw material exports, green economy measures must not displace vital economic sectors, but instead create dynamic new growth sectors,” she added.
Source
Thursday, June 2, 2011
World Environment Day 2011: Charcoal production is fast endangering East African’s forests
According to UNEP (2011), forest degradation and deforestation account for nearly 20% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Broadly, there are three main sources of forest degradation: commercial logging, fires, and gathering wood for fuel. Insects and pests also cause considerable forest degradation. For example, at the beginning of the 20th Century, Uganda’s tropical high forests covered 3,090,000 ha or 12% of the country’s area. Over the years, the forests have been gradually cleared and today estimates indicate reduction to about 730,000 ha, which is only 3% of Uganda’s area (NEMA, 2009).
Based on the above situation, this year’s World Environment Day theme on Forests: Nature at Your Service is like a notice to users that this service is soon closing if nothing happens to address the current human-induced lapses – deforestation and degradation.
For East Africa, degradation (the loss of quality of the forests, rather than coverage) manifests itself prominently in the need to meet the insatiable, growing demand for fuel wood and charcoal.Looking at the charcoal production process, in addition to the above inefficiencies, it results in loss of future trees as the burning, trampling on them occurs, while other forms of life and life support systems (biodiversity) just vanish due to forest clearance (which is a habitat and source of food for birds, and other innumerable animals).
As we celebrate this year’s World Environment Day we pose the crucial questions: How we make charcoal production a viable and sustainable income generating activity; what interventions can be taken up in a holistic manner to address the bigger energy demand, while securing economic growth and poverty reduction? What technology is available to contain the ‘demand’ at the local levels where charcoal production takes place?
Read the full article from here
Based on the above situation, this year’s World Environment Day theme on Forests: Nature at Your Service is like a notice to users that this service is soon closing if nothing happens to address the current human-induced lapses – deforestation and degradation.
For East Africa, degradation (the loss of quality of the forests, rather than coverage) manifests itself prominently in the need to meet the insatiable, growing demand for fuel wood and charcoal.Looking at the charcoal production process, in addition to the above inefficiencies, it results in loss of future trees as the burning, trampling on them occurs, while other forms of life and life support systems (biodiversity) just vanish due to forest clearance (which is a habitat and source of food for birds, and other innumerable animals).
As we celebrate this year’s World Environment Day we pose the crucial questions: How we make charcoal production a viable and sustainable income generating activity; what interventions can be taken up in a holistic manner to address the bigger energy demand, while securing economic growth and poverty reduction? What technology is available to contain the ‘demand’ at the local levels where charcoal production takes place?
Read the full article from here
Thursday, May 26, 2011
CDM Carbon Sink Tree Plantations: A Case Study in Tanzania
The study documents the tree plantation project at Idete in southern Tanzania and concludes that in an African context, such monoculture tree plantation model is non-sustainable from many points of view, even with market-based mechanisms such as Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) Certification in place.
Where this is not possible, mechanisms could be put in place to ensure that a substantial portion of project income is invested appropriately at the local level.
This report confirms propositions based on similar experiences included in the preliminary report (released in December 2009, titled “Potential Impacts of Tree Plantation Projects under the CDM: An African Case Study”). It would be valuable if other existing and proposed CDM carbon sink tree and agro-fuel plantation projects would conduct more thorough and wide ranging studies to establish the benefit or otherwise of such projects for each local setting, in advance of project implementation.
The negotiations at the UNFCCC COP16 in Cancun (December 2010) did not produce any definitive conclusion or recommendation in terms of including plantations in the rules for REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation), so tree plantation offset projects remain an uncertain issue in relation to future climate change policy developments, especially given the question mark over the future of the Kyoto Protocol.
What has emerged is that there is a fundamental problem in developing countries such as Tanzania. Opportunities for resource exploitation in combination with acquisition of cheap land are being grabbed by Northern corporations and their local agents, such as Green Resources Ltd. This growing trend - not limited to the case detailed in this report - is to the disadvantage of affected communities, and results in the destruction, degradation and/or pollution of the natural landscape while impacting negatively on biodiversity, food security, cultural traditions and water resources.
Such investments can also introduce new social problems. Easier access to recreational drugs, alcohol and junk foods that come with the cash economy can exacerbate the situation. Human health is in decline. Contagious diseases, especially those transmitted sexually like HIV/AIDS, are on the increase, affecting previously un-afflicted communities. The loss of traditional knowledge, and reduced access to wild medicinal plants, is making rural people increasingly dependent on expensive western medicine. However, such circumstances can also provide money-making opportunities for foreign corporations. They soon find new markets for antibiotics, ARVs, condoms, cell-phones, sweets, genetically-engineered seeds, weapons, cheap whisky and trinkets in the most remote corners of the world. This pattern perpetuates poverty at the community level, although sometimes a few well-connected individuals will become wealthy and influential, and this can be used as ‘evidence’ that foreign economic intervention is good for the local economy.
Source:
Where this is not possible, mechanisms could be put in place to ensure that a substantial portion of project income is invested appropriately at the local level.
This report confirms propositions based on similar experiences included in the preliminary report (released in December 2009, titled “Potential Impacts of Tree Plantation Projects under the CDM: An African Case Study”). It would be valuable if other existing and proposed CDM carbon sink tree and agro-fuel plantation projects would conduct more thorough and wide ranging studies to establish the benefit or otherwise of such projects for each local setting, in advance of project implementation.
The negotiations at the UNFCCC COP16 in Cancun (December 2010) did not produce any definitive conclusion or recommendation in terms of including plantations in the rules for REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation), so tree plantation offset projects remain an uncertain issue in relation to future climate change policy developments, especially given the question mark over the future of the Kyoto Protocol.
What has emerged is that there is a fundamental problem in developing countries such as Tanzania. Opportunities for resource exploitation in combination with acquisition of cheap land are being grabbed by Northern corporations and their local agents, such as Green Resources Ltd. This growing trend - not limited to the case detailed in this report - is to the disadvantage of affected communities, and results in the destruction, degradation and/or pollution of the natural landscape while impacting negatively on biodiversity, food security, cultural traditions and water resources.
Such investments can also introduce new social problems. Easier access to recreational drugs, alcohol and junk foods that come with the cash economy can exacerbate the situation. Human health is in decline. Contagious diseases, especially those transmitted sexually like HIV/AIDS, are on the increase, affecting previously un-afflicted communities. The loss of traditional knowledge, and reduced access to wild medicinal plants, is making rural people increasingly dependent on expensive western medicine. However, such circumstances can also provide money-making opportunities for foreign corporations. They soon find new markets for antibiotics, ARVs, condoms, cell-phones, sweets, genetically-engineered seeds, weapons, cheap whisky and trinkets in the most remote corners of the world. This pattern perpetuates poverty at the community level, although sometimes a few well-connected individuals will become wealthy and influential, and this can be used as ‘evidence’ that foreign economic intervention is good for the local economy.
Source:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)