Norway: Co2 Neutral or Co2 Exporter?


Norway has boldly announced plans to become a carbon neutral country by 2030, ahead of their original goal of 2050.

The plan will be achieved through domestic emissions cuts of approximately 66%, and through investment in overseas environmental projects which will offset Norway’s remaining emissions. Norway already has significant hydro electric power generation capacity by virtue of its mountainous terrain with many rivers and waterfalls.

Details of the scheme reveal ambitious spending targets in order to achieve these goals. The Norwegian government will invest $553 million per year in combating deforestation in developing countries in order to balance home emissions above the three million tons of Co2 absorbed by Norway’s home forestry schemes.

Further ’significant’ sums of money will be invested in renewable energy, mass transport and carbon capture technology to reduce the impact of Norway’s gas powered electricity generation plants. Taxation will be increased on diesel and petrol to raise revenue and encourage motorists to use alternative transport.

The more cynical amongst us may also note that Norway is the world’s third largest exporter of oil and natural gas. Record prices in these commodities have lead to a predicted budget surplus for 2008 of $80 billion, making such lavish schemes easier to fund. We assume that it is ok to continue earning record profits from fossil fuel production as long as other nations do the actual polluting?


 

Information and Links

Join the fray by commenting, tracking what others have to say, or linking to it from your blog.

Information
January 19th, 2008
6 Responses
Feeds and Links
Comment Feed
From This Author
Del.icio.us
Digg
Technorati
Categories
Commentary
Green Living
News
Our Environment

Other Posts
Lessons in Renewable Energy from China
Wresting With Climate Change Fatigue

Tags


Write a Comment

Take a moment to comment and tell us what you think. Some basic HTML is allowed for formatting.

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture. Click on the picture to hear an audio file of the word.
Click to hear an audio file of the anti-spam word

Reader Comments

Comment Number:
1
Written by:
ClimateHeretic
Posted on:
January 19, 2008 at 8:00 pm

Norway is a country trying to buy its way into the green “hall of fame”. I believe the EU already rejected their plan, stating that carbon off-setting was not allowed as an actual reduction.

Norway is not the success story that everyone thinks. So I think if people understand they are not doing anything “hard” they are just rich, it sort of takes the shine off.

2007 EU EEA Report - Norway

Comment Number:
2
Written by:
Russell Kord
Posted on:
January 21, 2008 at 2:41 pm

I see nothing abnormal about Norway (or any other nation, group or individual) trying to buy itself anything. Thats how the world works. If it can get itself a bargain by underpaying thats also OK.

The offsets should be audited on the actual effects, not on what USD amount was spent. I do not know if there is a standard CO2 currency, but I am sure somebody needs to invent one, and soon, because thats the only way to get the world’s attention. That is, by offering nations, groups and individuals a way to make a buck and get a bargain.

Comment Number:
3
Written by:
ClimateHeretic
Posted on:
January 21, 2008 at 7:22 pm

You see nothing abnormal in increasing your emissions, then just throwing a huge sum of money on someone else’s doorstep to do something about it?

Then claiming you are carbon neutral.

Comment Number:
4
Written by:
Metyu
Posted on:
January 21, 2008 at 11:41 pm

“I do not know if there is a standard CO2 currency, but I am sure somebody needs to invent one, and soon, because thats the only way to get the world’s attention.”

That is what all this fuss is about, and it is exactly what is going on. Don’t underestimate how manipulated the global economy is.

Climate change is creating an economic system that keeps countries and individuals in check, not dissimilar to aspects of globalisation (although I have yet to see a Green activist thrust a knife into his chest protesting CO2 emissions). It may not be what climatologists intended, but it is how it is being manipulated.

Fortunately for us, we have all the philanthropic treehuggers saving the planet from the nasty global elite by … encouraging the creation of a new currency and economic system. Oh, hold on.. er..

Comment Number:
5
Written by:
Kiashu
Posted on:
January 22, 2008 at 5:47 am

Norway’s a funny one. It’s like an alcoholic at the bar turning his ruddy face and glazed eyes to you over his drink, and saying, “I don’t want to be a drunk anymore, can I pay you not to drink?”

I don’t think a carbon currency is a good idea. We didn’t eliminate slavery by starting a slave market, after all. Much better is carbon taxing, combined with international agreements to move all countries towards a certain per capita level of emissions; countries above this level would pay a fine into an international fund, which would be distributed to countries under the level, to help investment in renewable energy, reforestation and the like.

Metyu, certainly many “green” people do nothing useful, and themselves contribute strongly to climate change and resource depletion.

However, there are those of us walking the walk to go with the talking the talk. There’s a riot for austerity, aiming to reduce our personal impact by 90% compared to a Western average. My experience is that a reduction of two-thirds may be achieved without significant discomfort or expense, and saving money. The next level of reduction takes some effort, and one or both of discomfort and expense.

Comment Number:
6
Written by:
Russell Kord
Posted on:
January 31, 2008 at 9:30 pm

I hope nobody thinks I advocate slavery. Slavery and indentured servitude was an abomination in the developed world which still sadly persists in small pockets of the developing world today. I just wanted to make a small practical suggestion about moving greedy powerful selfish people in the direction of reducing CO2 emissions…

It is great to have high moral principles and I applaud those who hold them. It took Abolitionists in England and the United States quite a while to achieve their goals and they did hold to their principles for many many years.

Of course, the risk of the long term survival of the human race and those creatures that have to exist alongside us was not an pressing issue. It took a couple of hundred years and a terrible civil war in the US to really make dent in Slavery.

Do we have that much time to avert catastrophic climatic problems?

Maybe we could compromise high principles? Lets get a fast and messy change by channeling all the greed and fear in free markets around the world and giving those powerful people a chance to make a buck. If we are lucky enough for this approach to buy us time, we can work to reach the lofty goals of living in balance with our environment and fellow creatures.

Or we could hold to high principles.
I just think we may not have 200 years to get the ideal result.