Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace

The World Bank's Climate Profiteering

By Daphne Wysham and Shakuntala Makhijani, Foreign Policy in Focus. Posted April 2, 2008.


The bank is turning dirty carbon credits into gold -- bad news for those seeking a real solution to the climate crisis.
Advertisement

The World Bank's long-running identity crisis is proving hard to shake. When efforts to rebrand itself as a "knowledge bank" didn't work, it devised a new identity as a "Green Bank." Really? Yes, it's true. Sure, the Bank continues to finance fossil fuel projects globally, but never mind. The World Bank has seized upon the immense challenges climate change poses to humanity and is now front and center in the complicated, international world of carbon finance. It can turn the dirtiest carbon credits into gold.

How exactly, does this work, you ask?

Quite simply: The Bank finances a fossil fuel project, involving oil, natural gas, or coal, in Poor Country A. Rich Country B asks the Bank to help arrange carbon credits so Country B can tell its carbon counters it's taking serious action on climate change. The World Bank kindly obliges, offering carbon credits for a price far lower than Country B would have to pay if Country B made those cuts at home. Country A gets a share of the cash to invest in equipment to make fossil fuel project slightly more efficient, the World Bank takes its 13 percent cut, and everyone is happy.

Everyone, that is, who is cashing in on this deal. If you're after a real solution to the climate crisis, these shenanigans can and should make you unhappy.

Aiding the Tata Group

Consider a project the International Finance Corporation (IFC) had scheduled for board consideration on March 27, but is now, according to its press office, slated for approval in April. (The World Bank Group's boards virtually never reject anything sent to them). The IFC, the World Bank's private sector lending arm, plans to back a massive coal-fired power plant in Mundra, a town in the Indian state of Gujarat. The complex of five 800 megawatt plants will cost $4.14 billion to build and be owned and operated by Tata Power Company Limited, a scion of India's largest multinational corporation, the Tata Group.

To put this in perspective, Tata Motors, a division of the same conglomerate, recently announced plans to buy the luxury car companies, Jaguar and Range Rover from U.S. automaker Ford for $2.3 billion. And Tata Power's 2007 revenues totaled $1.6 billion. So, it's hard not to ask how much help Tata needs from the World Bank, which has as its motto: "our dream is a world free of poverty." Several other corporations are involved. Toshiba, for example, will supply the steam turbine generators.

Once operational, the Mundra power plant will be India's third-largest emitter of greenhouse gases. But it doesn't stop there. Now, the World Bank has planned for the Tata coal burner to be eligible for carbon credits under Kyoto's Clean Development Mechanism. Carbon credits for a coal burner, you ask?

In the bizarre logic of the carbon market, a market the World Bank is both shaping and investing in, yes, Country B can get credits for helping a corporation, even one of the world's wealthiest corporations such as Tata, capture a few carbon emissions, as long as these emissions are captured in a "poor" country, like India, regardless of how rich the company involved may be.

Indonesian Coal

And it gets stranger still. One would hazard a guess that the IFC is lending $450 million, "considering investing up to $50 million in equity as part of its exposure to the project," and possibly helping Tata obtain $300 million from other sources at favorable rates for the Tata burner because India has no other choice but to burn its own abundant supply of coal. But, no, the IFC plans to import coal from Indonesia to fuel the plant in India. In fact, Tata bought a 30 percent stake in two Indonesian coal-mining units for $1.3 billion in April 2007 in order to secure the coal resources for the Mundra plant.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: corruption, climate change, world bank

Daphne Wysham is a fellow and Shakuntala Makhijani is an intern with the Institute for Policy Studies. They are both contributors to Foreign Policy In Focus.



Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Criminalize harmful behavior by corporations and institutions
Posted by: Ignatz deFyre on Apr 2, 2008 1:55 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If an individual were to cook up such schemes, they would be prosecuted. Legislation and regulation is needed to hold corporations to account.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Carbon credits" are a dumb idea...
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Apr 2, 2008 2:18 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...unless you're the joker who has the Carbon Credit printing press.

If you do own a CC press, consider yourself a Carbontrepreneur. Then, inventing an artificial economy for a government-enforced product that no one really would buy given the choice, makes wonderful sense.

Inventing an artificial economy will do nothing to address the challenges of global warming. It is only good for the Big Green lobby; the Carbontrepreneurs.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

World Bank: Agent of poverty, hunger and environmental devastation.
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Apr 2, 2008 3:29 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Classic examples of this include the World Bank's role in the Chad Cameroon pipeline, which has not brought the promised peace and prosperity that the World Bank said justified the $4 billion expenditure, but instead has brought corruption, a civil war that might have deposed the president Deby (friend of Exxon and the U.S.), and which contributes to the instability and bloodshed in bordering Darfur.

The other pipeline in that conflict is the Chinese one that reaches from southern Sudan, also a site of bloody warfare and repression, all the way to the Red Sea. China has the Sudanese government in its pocket, and the U.S. has the Chadian government, and the people who live in Sudan and Chad all heartily wish their countries held no oil all at all, so that they could live in peace.

That's the downside, and unfortunately there is no upside. There are no $4 billion dollar renewable energy projects being financed by the World Bank in Africa, even though Africa is ideal for solar power. There are no giant wind turbines or rural electricity grids being built by the World Bank. The only large agricultural loans they give are those intended to turn Third World countries into commodity export plantations run by slave labor. Together with the IMF, the U.S. Export-Import Bank, and the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, they make up the world's biggest loansharking operation.

If the World Bank's charter were amended to force it to support local autonomy and clean renewable energy, it might be worth keeping - but with the likes of PNAC neocon Paul Wolfowitz being appointed to it, that's not too likely.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This piece doesn't surprise me
Posted by: Rod from Canada on Apr 2, 2008 3:36 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A close examination of this bank's track record reveals a pretty sleazy trail. It is very adept at funnelling cash to various elites at the expense of the environment and indigenous/working class peoples the world over. A read of John Perkins' recent books will reveal the unvarnished truth about the WB and its sidekick, the IMF.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I didn't know they were taking the lead here...
Posted by: Coleman on Apr 2, 2008 4:42 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...but I've always thought the carbon market was a ludicrous idea. Straight-up legislation/regulation enforced by a fair treaty would be much simpler, and would at least involve the pretense of a democratic process. Leave it to the "economic hitmen" to take a daunting problem and turn it inside out with financial tomfoolery. Profit is extracted and the world is worse off. Just ask Latin America!

Civil society has no voice in the World Bank's actions, and now we're giving it more power? Dangerous.

If we didn't have corporate criminals running the government, the USA could bargain in good faith for an open process of global regulation and inspection, enforced by a reformed UN. Wealthier countries could offset the carbon emitted by the new industrializers by converting to greener infrastructure, while simultaneously offering our expertise to the emerging economies to help them go green in the first place. And we could pay for it by taxing the (record-breaking) profits of fossil fuel corporations.

And there's plenty of room for smart, no-cost conservation, too. I'm waiting for the Hummer H2 Illegality Act.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

world bank
Posted by: cwilsondrum on Apr 2, 2008 7:48 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the world bank only helps poor countries get on their feet so speak,so they can be raped just as soon as possible. it is a corrupt tool of the corporate class. and has played it's role in the shock doctrine.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As Coleman says, India could/should go green in the first place
Posted by: AsteroidMiner on Apr 2, 2008 7:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
India HAS nuclear reactors and nuclear bombs already.
We should give or sell India the latest [and therefore safest and
cleanest] nuclear power plant technology. Coal fired plants will
have to be replaced as soon as they are built if the world comes to
its senses. Nuclear power saves us from 14.7 million tons of CO2
per 1000 megawatts per year, compared to coal. Remember that
coal contains uranium and a long list of other poisons. The
alternatives are the collapse of civilization and the extinction of
Homo Sapiens. India is dependent on the monsoon rains for
food. India has the second biggest population, which is its
vulnerability. If the monsoon winds shift even a little bit,
agriculture will collapse in India and civilization in India will
collapse with agriculture. The rest of the world will not be able
to help because worldwide drought is already happening because
of the climate change. India could well be the first domino to
fall.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This has Bush regime written all over it
Posted by: PaulC on Apr 2, 2008 10:28 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
IMF/World Bank has left a legacy of gross mismanagement of the economies of developing nations over the past 27 years or so. This all peaked late in the Clinton Administration with the East Asian crisis (1997) followed by the Russian Crisis (1998).

The failure of their policies and the sheer arrogance of the way they were rammed down the throats of developing nations, regardless of the social suffering and political upheaval that very often resulted, led to the now familiar rioting that follows global economic summits around the world. This, in turn, put World Bank under intense scrutiny to reform the way it does business, to weed out the right wing free market extremists who were dictating policy.

Then along came the Bush Administration and it is as if World Bank entered a time warp and none of the failures or the excesses ever happened. Everything is once again corporate domination rationalized by extreme free market ideology.

But I do think that the world is not a part of that corrupt little world of make-believe. The genie is out of the bottle, as we saw with Chavez's new pan-American Bank which is intended as a replacement for the IMF in Latin America. The world has now acknowledged not only global warming but the very concept that we need to manage our impact on the planet. The concerted effort of corporations to trivialize man's impact has been overcome - a major victory.

And the global recognition and widespread acceptance of the work of men such as Joseph Stiglitz who carefully dissected the repeated failures, excesses and crony capitalism of World Bank policies has empowered developing nations to better control their own destinies according to their unique situations and requirements.

The corruption the above article exposes with the Tata deal sounds, feels and smells like the same crony capitalism that Bush is ramming down our throats with his Iraq War scam and runaway oil company profits. It is the same group of greedy SOB's that are selling out our country for a buck.

peace,
Paul

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

its a huge scam to finance other things
Posted by: unity1 on Apr 3, 2008 11:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
its just another way of denial and making money out of disaster - carbon trading emissions is a huge scam a huge greenwash and is all that can be expected from organizations like this that see a continual business approach in the face of global warming - nothing will change unless we the people make it so

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Carbon trading and nuclear-steam tech are scams.
Posted by: nightgaunt on Apr 3, 2008 12:50 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I find it interesting that the World Bank and IMF doesn't support the fourth leg nuclear-steam which has its own greenhouse gas and dangerous waste problems.
Perhaps they are but wasn't directly relevent to the article. The plan originally posited was that as the new first world countries come on line (China,Brazil,India among others) were to take the next step in cleaner technologies. Instead the same dirty fossil fuels are heavily supported to our detriment. Not wind,solar,biomass etc.
Our whole population is too large and inevitably millions will die as the world adjusts to new conditions developing as the climate alters to a new pattern. We won't be immune from it either.
Just putting solar panels on every structure on earth could make a huge impact on the level of energy consumption of fossil fuel generated power.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]