Comment Log Display
Below is the comment you selected to display.
Comment 12 for Comment on the potential for international, sector-based offset credits in the Cap-and-Trade Program (sectorbased2015-ws) - 1st Workshop.
First Name: Emiliya
Last Name: Rasheva
Email Address: emrasheva@yahoo.com
Affiliation:
Subject: NO to international offsets in California's Cap-and-Trade
Comment:
NO to international offsets in California's Cap-and-Trade The inclusion of international forest sector-based offset credits within California Cap-and-Trade to cover up to 8 percent of emissions reduction goals would be a major mistake for the following reasons. * False solution to climate change. The net effect of a forest carbon offset on greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere is at best zero. If emissions are reduced in one place, but through the sales of carbon credits emissions are allowed to continue somewhere else these emissions cancel each other out. Forest offsets are a cost containment mechanism that reduces the impact of A.B. 32 goal of reducing global warming pollution. * High levels of vulnerability and uncertainty. Forests are vulnerable to the impacts of climate change itself as well as international forest offset projects experience difficulties in constructing baseline, determining additionality, assessing leakages, monitoring implementation, and measuring real carbon stocks and emission reductions. * Existence of domestic offsets. California's Cap-and-Trade program already incorporates the use of domestic carbon offsets through forestry practices, livestock biogas control, and destruction of ozone-depleting substances. If regulated industries desire to offset some of their emissions, they can do it even currently. Forest offsets are ineffective in reducing net greenhouse gas emissions, but at least domestic carbon offset projects can economically and environmentally benefit Californians. * Negative consequences. The inclusion of international carbon offsets in California's Climate Policy is very likely to (i) increase pollution in California; (ii) potentially exacerbate fraud, corruption, large-scale land acquisitions, human rights violations and negative environmental consequences; (iii) encourage the international institutionalization of an ineffective and damaging practice; and (iv) help divert attention away from the urgent need of a sharp and immediate reduction of global greenhouse gas emissions at source. Absolute equality and fairness may never meet because people are all so different in their perceptions and interests, but the California Air Resources Board has the responsibility to effectively represent the will of the people who will bear the true economic, environmental and social costs of international offsets. References attached.
Attachment: www.arb.ca.gov/lists/com-attach/12-sectorbased2015-ws-UCJSMQZhVGJXIwZj.pdf
Original File Name: References_Comment.pdf
Date and Time Comment Was Submitted: 2015-11-16 11:36:01
If you have any questions or comments please contact Office of the Ombudsman at (916) 327-1266.