Skip to content
Menu
REDD-Monitor
  • Start here
  • About REDD-Monitor
  • REDD: An introduction
  • Contact
REDD-Monitor

Norway’s support for the aviation sector’s plans to burn the planet

Posted on 22 September 201625 April 2017

In September 2015, a meeting took place in New York between Per Pharo and Marte Sendstad of Norway’s International Climate and Forest Initiative, and Nigel Purvis from the Washington DC-based consulting firm, Climate Advisers.

During the meeting, they talked about the aviation industry’s plans to offset its emissions, in order to avoid taking meaningful action on climate change.

Both Climate Advisers and NICFI are very much in favour of this proposal to allow unlimited growth for the aviation sector.

The proposals are due to be discussed at the 39th Assembly of the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), taking place from 27 September to 7 October in Montreal.

Nice work if you can get it

Climate Advisers got the go-ahead from NICFI for the work and in an email to Pharo and Sendstad, Purvis wrote:

Based on the authorization to begin work that you provided this last Tuesday, we have secured the services of Garrett Russo, an experienced organizer with ICAO and REDD experience. Garrett starts early next week.

Russo’s previous job was Communications Director with VCS. He wrote to REDD-Monitor in May 2013. Russo told me that VCS would not help to stop boiler room scam companies selling worthless carbon credits to retail investors by putting a notice on the VCS website explaining that carbon credits were not a suitable investment.

Instead, VCS has a page on its website explaining that “VCS is not an investment firm, and as such, does not provide any direct advice on the purchase or trading of VCUs.” VCS follows this with some advice for people who wish to buy carbon credits.

In a note about Russo’s new job, funded by NICFI, Climate Advisers explained (under the sub-heading “Purpose and goal”) that,

Climate Advisers will provide support for NICFI’s efforts to include REDD+ offsets under a new global market-based mechanism (MBM) to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from aviation.

The total budget for Climate Adviser’s work was NOK1,483,350 (US$191,339). But the document released under Norway’s freedom of information rules has been censored:2016-09-22-154828_1041x1026_scrot

I can only guess that NICFI is embarrassed about Climate Advisers’ extravagent hourly rates. On a previous contract with NICFI, Nigel Purvis billed himself out at an hourly rate of US$639.

Offsets and emissions from aviation set to soar

Nigel Wolosin and Garrett Russo teamed up with some of EDF’s carbon trade proponents to write a paper recently published in the Carbon and Climate Law Review.

Not at all coincidentally, EDF’s Annie Petsonk sits on the editorial board of the Carbon and Climate Law Review.

Titled “REDD+ in ICAO: Ready for Takeoff”, the paper does not consider that emissions from flying could be reduced.

Instead, EDF, Climate Advisors and the aviation sector see emissions soaring by 700% by 2050. And EDF and Climate Advisers imagine REDD credits from the World Bank’s FCPF Carbon Fund soaring to meet the demand:

2016-09-22-162047_907x942_scrot

The only actual data on the graph is the figure for 2015: zero. Everything beyond that is pure supposition.

Nevertheless, the paper confidently claims that,

REDD+ units generated through the FCPF Carbon Fund programmes could total about 160 million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (MMtCO 2 e) for the years 2021 through 2025, satisfying between 27% to 71% of cumulative aviation emission unit demand over this period.

By the end of the paper, the authors’ enthusiasm has entirely got the better of them:

The estimated pipeline of jurisdictional REDD+ units could help meet a significant portion of aviation’s potential demand for emissions units, even when assuming REDD+ provides the only substantial supply of emissions units used to meet nations’ INDCs.

In order to reach this conclusion, all we have to do is assume that through the miracle known as REDD, forest fires stop in Indonesia and the Amazon, governments stop building dams and highways through the forests, extractive industries are excluded from forests, corruption disappears overnight, landgrabbing stops, and illegal deforestation vanishes in a puff of REDD smoke.

Having assumed all of that, all that remains for us to do is to overlook the fact that offsetting does not reduce emissions.

REDD proponents are desperate for a very large, very polluting industry to buy REDD credits. Aviation matches that description well.
 

  • Twitter
  • Linkedin
  • Reddit
  • email
  • Facebook

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

SUBSCRIBE!

Enter your email address to receive notification of new posts.

Recent themes
Natural Climate Solutions
WWF's conservation scandals
Aviation and offsetting
Conservation Watch

Recent Comments

  • Ian on Oakmount Management Partners, Oakwood Financial Management, Oakmount and Partners, Baron Traders, Emerald Knight, Oakmount Global Management, MH Carbon, DMD Media, Morgan Forbes, and Centrium Capital Markets: A network of scam companies
  • Chris Lang on Green IS Group: An FSC-certified Ponzi scheme
  • Tom Rayner on Green IS Group: An FSC-certified Ponzi scheme
  • Alan N. Connor on 30×30 target “not supported by the science”
  • Jeremy Sweet on 30×30 target “not supported by the science”

Recent Posts

  • Oakland Institute and Survival International call on UNESCO and IUCN to cut ties with the Tanzanian government over the most recent human rights abuses against the Maasai in Loliondo
  • Statement from Kichwa Indigenous communities about the Cordillera Azul National Park REDD (PNCAZ) project: “No to the false climate solutions offered as ‘Nature Based Solutions’ and ‘carbon neutrality’ by oil and mining companies that pollute in other regions of the world, such as Shell, Total, BHP, and others, who buy carbon from the PNCAZ.”
  • 30×30 target “not supported by the science”
  • Aby L. Sène on “Land Grabs and Conservation Propaganda” in Africa
  • NIHT Inc’s misleading statements about the company’s REDD operations in Papua New Guinea

Recent Comments

  • Ian on Oakmount Management Partners, Oakwood Financial Management, Oakmount and Partners, Baron Traders, Emerald Knight, Oakmount Global Management, MH Carbon, DMD Media, Morgan Forbes, and Centrium Capital Markets: A network of scam companies
  • Chris Lang on Green IS Group: An FSC-certified Ponzi scheme
  • Tom Rayner on Green IS Group: An FSC-certified Ponzi scheme
  • Alan N. Connor on 30×30 target “not supported by the science”
  • Jeremy Sweet on 30×30 target “not supported by the science”

Issues and Organisations

30x30 AB 32 Andes Amazon Boiler rooms California Can REDD save ... ? Carbon accounting Carbon Credits Carbon Offsets CDM Conservation-Watch Conservation International COP21 Paris Cryptocurrency Deforestation FCPF FERN Financing REDD Forest definition Fossil fuels FPP Friends of the Earth FSC Greenpeace Guest post ICAO Illegal logging Indigenous Peoples Natural Climate Solutions NGO statements Plantations Poznan R-M interview REDD and rights REDD in the news Risk RSPO-Watch Safeguards Sengwer The Nature Conservancy UN-REDD UNFCCC World Bank WRM WWF

Countries

Australia Bolivia Brazil Cambodia Cameroon Canada China Colombia Congo Basin region Costa Rica DR Congo Ecuador El Salvador European Union France Germany Guatemala Guyana Honduras India Indonesia Kenya Laos Madagascar Malaysia Mexico Nicaragua Norway Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Republic of Congo Sierra Leone Sweden Tanzania Thailand Uganda UK Uncategorized United Arab Emirates USA Vietnam West Papua
©2022 REDD-Monitor | Powered by WordPress and Superb Themes!