Fri. May 06, 2016 Get Published  Get Alerts
HOME  |LOGIN
ABOUT | CONTACT US | SUPPORT US
Climate Smart Aid Is Anything But

Comments(0)
By William Yeatman

International organizations like the World Bank and the United Nations are supposed to help the world’s poor escape poverty, but fully convinced they are doing good, these development agencies are pushing an anti-development agenda.

Now here’s an inconvenient truth: curbing the planet’s carbon footprint necessarily slows economic growth, the primary engine of human well-fare. International aid organizations need to carefully consider the impact of the climate “solutions” they advocate, lest they do more harm than good.

The International Energy Agency estimates that it would cost $45 trillion through 2050 to mitigate global warming through efforts aimed at “greening” the global economy. Most of that would be spent in developing countries, to prevent them from fueling their growing economies with hydrocarbon energy sources like coal and oil. These fossil fuels are cheap and still plentiful, but burning them to create energy frees the CO² they store, contributing to climate change.

Raising hundreds of billions of dollars a year to finance a global green energy revolution is a key component of current negotiations for a successor climate treaty to the Kyoto Protocol. In fact, European Union Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas recently declared, “No money, no deal.” And clean energy aid was a topic of discussion at last month’s Major Economies Meeting, hosted by the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama.

Naturally, international aid agencies are jockeying for position to broker this wealth transfer.

United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said that his organization is the “natural arena” for coordinated international action on climate change. To that end the U.N. operates two programs to facilitate the flow of climate mitigation aid to developing countries—the Global Environment Facility and the Clean Development Mechanism.

Not to be outdone, the World Bank recently unveiled a “Strategic Framework” for global warming and development that calls for “unprecedented global cooperation” for the “transfer of finance and technology from developed to developing countries.” The Bank established a Carbon Finance Unit and several Carbon Investment Funds to distribute climate change mitigation aid.

Besides the inefficiencies inherent to duplicative bureaucracies, there are major problems with this “climate smart” approach to development. For starters, it is unlikely that Western bureaucrats can create a green energy infrastructure in developing countries. The history of development assistance is littered with abandoned projects backed by the best of intentions. Already there is evidence that climate aid is more of the same.

Under the Kyoto Protocol, for example, companies subject to climate regulations can meet their carbon “cap” by paying for emissions reduction projects in developing countries. According to the journal Nature, the U.N. certified $6 billions’ worth of emissions “savings” for reductions in HFC-23, a potent greenhouse gas. Yet removing the HFC-23 cost $130 million. That’s a lot of waste.

There are also ethical considerations. A coal-fired power plant may offend environmentalist sensibilities, but it would be a blessing for the almost 2 billion people in the world today who use charcoal, dung, and wood to heat and cook.

In his book, Global Crises, Global Solutions, Danish statistician Bjørn Lomborg persuasively argues that humanity faces many problems that are more pressing than warming decades down the road. After all, what good is a slightly cooler planet a century from now to a child dying of malaria today? In terms of saving lives, Lomborg shows why climate change mitigation is an inferior, albeit far less ‘sexy’, investment to water sanitation and halting disease.

Aid agencies should also consider forgone economic development. The U.N. and the World Bank want to redistribute trillions of dollars to create new green energy infrastructure whereas in the free market these scarce resources would be allocated to create wealth. In a globalized world, inefficiencies of this magnitude lower the tide and all boats with it.

Slowing economic growth has very real human consequences, such as fewer schools, worse health care, and lower environmental quality. That’s why a richer-but-warmer future is better for human well being than a poorer-but-cooler future, according to Indur Goklany, author of The Improving State of the World.

Instead of economically harmful global warming policies, development agencies should concentrate their considerable institutional knowledge on advancing pro-growth policies, like trade liberalization. Today, free trade needs an influential booster like the World Bank. Energy intensive export industries in developing countries are threatened by carbon taxes imposed by rich countries, under the pretext of fighting climate change. Retaliatory tariffs would be likely, which could easily escalate into a global trade war.

That would be a tragedy. By allowing developing countries to use their comparative advantage—inexpensive labor—international free trade has proven the fastest route out of poverty for hundreds of millions of people.

To avoid giving atmospheric chemistry priority over human welfare, the aid industry should ensure that the risks of global warming policies are considered as rigorously as the risks of global warming itself.


William Yeatman is an energy policy analyst at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.




Comments in Chronological order (0 total comments)

Report Abuse
Quick Links Twitter Face Book Get Alerts Contact Us Enter Ia-Forum Student Award Competition
ANNOUNCEMENTS
THE WORLD'S DISCUSSING...
05/06/2016: Brexit—in or out? Implications of the United Kingdom’s referendum on EU membership More
05/05/2016: In St. Louis, a gateway to innovation and inclusion More
05/05/2016: What’s significant—and not—about North Korea’s Party Congress More
05/05/2016: Why is Turkey’s Davutoglu getting skewered by his own party for the EU migrant deal? More
05/05/2016: Hutchins Roundup: Housing tax credits, Head Start, and more More
05/05/2016: Hutchins Roundup: Housing tax credits, Head Start, and more More
05/05/2016: How John Roberts Begat Donald Trump More
05/04/2016: The Estate Tax at 100: Its history in the polls More
05/04/2016: China’s automation push undercuts US politician promises to ‘bring the jobs back’ with tougher trade deals More
05/04/2016: North Korea’s party congress: Grandiose in isolation More
05/04/2016: North Korea’s party congress: Grandiose in isolation More
05/04/2016: The world's children are already suffering from climate change More
05/04/2016: I took the ‘Fiscal Ship’ test with an eye toward innovation More
05/04/2016: Indianapolis' War on Suburban Lifestyle More
05/04/2016: What does climate change have to do with Zika, and how is the US responding? More
05/03/2016: Who Was the Real Adam Smith? More
05/03/2016: How foreign tax changes affect U.S. businesses and the prospects for tax reform More
05/03/2016: How the U.S. can better help militaries around the world More
05/03/2016: How the U.S. can better help militaries around the world More
05/03/2016: When It Comes to Politics, Corruption Is Subtler Than You Think More
05/03/2016: How do companies come up with new ideas? More
05/03/2016: What NGOs think about Israel matters More
05/03/2016: The Bitcoin Ecosystem's Communications Deficits More
05/03/2016: Brexit and the Lessons of American Federalism More
05/03/2016: Let's Be Honest about Trade Agreements and Domestic Regulation More
05/03/2016: A Walk Through the JOBS Act of 2012: Deregulation in the Wake of Financial Crisis More
05/02/2016: Greece and creditors in gridlock. Again. More
05/02/2016: Trump's Trade Wall Will Make Americans Poorer More
05/02/2016: Securing Europe's borders: The first step to a comprehensive asylum policy More
05/02/2016: Why Europe’s energy policy has been a strategic success story More
05/02/2016: Why Europe’s energy policy has been a strategic success story More
05/02/2016: Why Europe’s energy policy has been a strategic success story More
05/02/2016: A Cure for the Transatlantic Trade Blues More
05/02/2016: The shifting nature of threats to Israel in its neighborhood More
05/01/2016: Trump on U.S. Foreign and Economic Policy More
04/30/2016: President Obama's Legacy Is Endless War More
04/30/2016: Look to States, Not Just Courts, for Drone Privacy Protections More
04/29/2016: Ethiopia’s outsized importance to African security More
04/29/2016: Dear Indiana: You're Not Getting Killed on Trade More
04/29/2016: Africa in the news: Buhari to sign 2016 budget, malaria incidence in Africa down, and Machar returns to South Sudan More
04/29/2016: Breaking up the big banks won't stop another financial crisis More
04/29/2016: Closed borders will make Europe collapse More
04/29/2016: Closed borders will make Europe collapse More
04/29/2016: Governing the modern city More
04/29/2016: Persistent Suitor: Washington Wants India as an Ally to Contain China More
04/28/2016: The ACLU's Cynical Attack on Criminal Justice Reform More
04/28/2016: Hutchins Roundup: Housing market, intergenerational transmission of poverty, and more More
04/28/2016: Hutchins Roundup: Housing market, intergenerational transmission of poverty, and more More
04/28/2016: Donald Trump Offers Foreign Policy Vision: Contradictory, but Still Best of a Bad Lot More
04/28/2016: On the soda tax, Clinton and Sanders contradict themselves More
More...
About | Contact Us | Support Us | Terms and Conditions

All Rights Reserved. Copyright 2002 - 2016