The Kyoto Protocol and Jakarta's regreening<\/p>\n
Edward McMillan, Jakarta<\/p>\n
It seems strange, but Jakarta may be in line to benefit
\nhandsomely from its lack of greenery. With tree cover accounting
\nfor just 10 percent of the city's surface area, Jakarta is one of
\nthe least vegetated cities on the planet. That has serious knock-
\non consequences for air quality, flooding and urban temperatures.<\/p>\n
But it also represents a golden opportunity for remedial
\naction -- which, thanks to the Kyoto Protocol, is exactly what
\nWestern governments and companies are desperate to try. Jakarta
\nnow finds itself in the remarkable position of not only being
\nable to "re-green" itself at someone else's expense, but also
\nbeing able to make a tidy profit in the process.<\/p>\n
The key lies with efforts to tackle global warming. The Kyoto
\nProtocol stipulates that by 2012 the industrialized nations
\nshould have reduced their carbon emissions by 5 percent below
\n1990 levels. Many are on-track to miss this target by a wide
\nmargin, unwilling to impose the costly and politically-unpopular
\nmeasures on energy utilities, industry and vehicle owners that
\nwould be necessary to cut carbon discharges by the requisite
\namount.<\/p>\n
Help is at hand, however, in the form of "offsets". Under the
\nKyoto Protocol, nations and companies are able to claim credit
\nfor reducing other people's carbon emissions. This makes sense:
\nGreenhouse gases mix uniformly in the atmosphere, so it doesn't
\nreally matter where particular abatement projects take place.<\/p>\n
For example, an industrialized nation could invest in a
\nhydropower plant in the developing world (where land and labor
\nare cheap) and count the carbon savings of such "clean"
\nelectricity generation towards its own national carbon quota. Or
\na utility company operating in Europe that emits millions of
\ntonnes of carbon dioxide each year could become "carbon neutral"
\nsimply by planting thousands of trees in Asia to absorb its
\nemissions.<\/p>\n
Four million hectares of such "offset plantations" have now
\nbeen established, and the figure is growing daily. The
\nInternational Automobile Association, for instance, is planting
\n30,000 trees in Mexico to offset the 5,500 tonnes of carbon
\nemitted annually by Formula One car racing.<\/p>\n
The Tokyo Electric Power Company is planting 3,000 hectares
\nof eucalyptus forest in Tasmania in order to yield 130,000 tonnes
\nof carbon credits. The Dutch government is investing heavily in a
\n20,000 hectare poplar plantation in Romania. General Motors has
\nplanted over one million trees since 1990 to partially compensate
\nfor its carbon emissions.<\/p>\n
And this is where Jakarta really has something to offer,
\nbecause it boasts distinct advantages over such rural forestation
\nschemes. For a start, planting trees in an urban environment is
\nmuch more cost-effective in carbon terms than planting them in
\nthe countryside. Urban trees not only absorb carbon dioxide
\ndirectly, they also provide buildings with shade and reduce urban
\ntemperatures through leaf evaporation.<\/p>\n
Just a 10 percent increase in tree cover can reduce a city's
\nair temperature by up to half a degree Celsius. That means less
\nair-conditioning, which, in turn, means lower electricity demand
\nand lower carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. A
\ngovernment or company seeking to offset its carbon emissions
\ncould plant half the number of trees in Jakarta that it would
\nhave to in a rural area.<\/p>\n
Jakarta is also in desperate need of trees for reasons
\nunrelated to global warming. The United Nations estimates that
\nthere are six thousand premature deaths in Jakarta each year due
\nto air pollution. Suitably-planted urban trees could bring this
\nnumber down substantially by removing particulate matter, ozone,
\nsulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide from the air -- by as much as
\nten per cent according to some studies.<\/p>\n
Imagine the public relations value to a company of being able
\nto claim it was actively saving lives by re-greening a city: An
\nopportunity not offered by planting trees in the countryside.<\/p>\n
And here Jakarta's urban desert actually gives it an advantage
\nover other cities. There are, after all, far more opportunities
\nto plant new trees in a city with just 10 percent tree cover than
\nin cities that are not so denuded.<\/p>\n
Such an "urban offset" project has not been attempted before:
\nJakarta would be a world first. Of course, difficulties would
\nhave to be overcome. In order to count as legitimate offsets
\nunder the Kyoto Protocol, carbon reductions have to be verifiable
\nand measured against a baseline "business-as-usual" scenario,
\nassessing how many tonnes of carbon would have been emitted in
\nthe absence of the offset project.<\/p>\n
Calculating such a baseline for a rapidly-growing and evolving
\ncity like Jakarta would be tricky. But that's exactly the sort of
\nchallenge the World Bank's Prototype Carbon Fund has been set up
\nto address, and the fact that Jakarta already has an air-quality
\nmonitoring network in place will simplify the process.<\/p>\n
Carbon offsetting is a growing business. The capitalization of
\ncarbon funds worldwide has increased by $675 million in the past
\nyear and a half alone. And yet viable offset projects are in such
\nshort supply that the International Emissions Trading Association
\nestimates that just 5 percent of this new money has so far been
\ninvested.<\/p>\n
Jakarta desperately needs trees. And, it seems, the
\ngovernments and companies of industrialized nations desperately
\nneed cities like Jakarta to offset their carbon emissions. Such
\nsymmetry spells good news. This could be Jakarta's opportunity to
\nreverse years of environmental neglect and finally re-green its
\nurban desert.<\/p>\n
The writer is a British freelance writer based in Jakarta.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/the-kyoto-protocol-and-jakartas-regreening-1447893297", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }