We all know how climate change has become one of the biggest global concerns that man has ever faced. It is an issue that leaves no person unaffected. As it is a global problem, it is expected that there should be a global solution and that it is the responsibility of every nation to address. Having left Canada and my job at Climate Change Central for a marketing position in Nepal, I didn’t really expect to be doing climate change work, but as it turns out climate change has become a pretty big policy issue in Nepal. Of course there are a lot of pressing needs that the government must address that concerns more basic needs (poverty, education, electricity etc..), addressing climate change is still emerging as a major problem and an opportunity in Nepal.
Some background… Nepal is a highly rural country with 80% of the population living in non-urban centres. In addition, the GDP per capita of Nepal is among the lowest in the world. Don’t quote me on this, but I believe that it is the 11th poorest nation in the world. As such, the overall ghg emissions from this country and on a per capita basis are undoubtedly one of the lowest in the world. Even though Nepal produces relatively little ghg emissions, it stands to be affected a lot by climate change. Being a mountainous nation, the Himalayas provide an abundance of water to Nepal and neighbouring India. With the melting of glaciers, floods could become a larger issue in the short term and in the long term drought may occur when glaciers melt away. Being a highly agrarian society, changing weather patterns will also greatly affect Nepal in that agricultural crops may suffer from drought or flooding or even just shifts in temperatures and growing seasons. Subsistence farmers may face a situation where they are no longer able to subsist.
Impacts aside, a strategy needs to be adopted in Nepal that not only addresses adaption, but also to look at mitigation strategies that reduce ghg emissions for the greater global good, and that also can benefit Nepal financially. Possibilities exist to leverage action on reducing ghg emissions into revenue for certain sectors on the Nepalese economy. This may be done through mechanisms like the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) process through the Kyoto Protocol, or other voluntary measures like the Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS). Simply put, a developed country (that has binding ghg reduction targets) or an organization (that has a regulatory obligation to reduce ghg emissions) can, in effect, reduce emissions by investing in projects in developing nations (Annex II countries signed on to the Kyoto Protocol) or projects that are outside regulated activities. There are many complicating factors that make things quite convoluted, but this is the gist of it.
So, for example, if a company is looking to reduce it’s emissions but implementing process changes internally to reduce emissions are cost prohibitive, they may look to other ways to reduce emissions in a more cost effective manner. This might include investing in an “emissions offset” project which would reduce emissions in a developing nation. The emission reductions that are created due to the project would then be counted as an emission reduction for compliance by that company. Because climate change is a global issue, it theoretically does not matter where the emission reductions take place, as long as they truly take place…
So, if a community forest area in Nepal manages to reduce it’s carbon output through sustainable harvesting practices and they “sell” their emission reductions to a private firm from North America, both parties stand to gain. The Community Forest User Group gains a economic benefit for their sustainable harvesting practice, and the company gets carbon offset credits which help it achieve regulatory compliance at a cheaper rate than investing in costly upgrades to reduce emissions internally. Simple right?? Well, not really, but that will be a discussion for another day. There are always other complicating factors such as risk of project failure or reversal, problems of additionality (whether the project is truly incrementally reducing ghg emissions), project implementation and documentation… the list goes on.
So where does Nepal stand? Well, things are in the fledgling stages, but theoretically there is plenty of opportunity for carbon offset projects including: carbon sequestration through forestry practices, energy efficiency and renewable energy projects (ie. using bio-briquettes for heating, biogas and biodiesel for alternative fuels). There is a great deal of interest currently and projects will have to be initiated on a pilot basis to determine feasibility and cost viability, but there is no doubt as there is increasing worldwide carbon constraints the viability will continue to rise….
Some background… Nepal is a highly rural country with 80% of the population living in non-urban centres. In addition, the GDP per capita of Nepal is among the lowest in the world. Don’t quote me on this, but I believe that it is the 11th poorest nation in the world. As such, the overall ghg emissions from this country and on a per capita basis are undoubtedly one of the lowest in the world. Even though Nepal produces relatively little ghg emissions, it stands to be affected a lot by climate change. Being a mountainous nation, the Himalayas provide an abundance of water to Nepal and neighbouring India. With the melting of glaciers, floods could become a larger issue in the short term and in the long term drought may occur when glaciers melt away. Being a highly agrarian society, changing weather patterns will also greatly affect Nepal in that agricultural crops may suffer from drought or flooding or even just shifts in temperatures and growing seasons. Subsistence farmers may face a situation where they are no longer able to subsist.
Impacts aside, a strategy needs to be adopted in Nepal that not only addresses adaption, but also to look at mitigation strategies that reduce ghg emissions for the greater global good, and that also can benefit Nepal financially. Possibilities exist to leverage action on reducing ghg emissions into revenue for certain sectors on the Nepalese economy. This may be done through mechanisms like the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) process through the Kyoto Protocol, or other voluntary measures like the Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS). Simply put, a developed country (that has binding ghg reduction targets) or an organization (that has a regulatory obligation to reduce ghg emissions) can, in effect, reduce emissions by investing in projects in developing nations (Annex II countries signed on to the Kyoto Protocol) or projects that are outside regulated activities. There are many complicating factors that make things quite convoluted, but this is the gist of it.
So, for example, if a company is looking to reduce it’s emissions but implementing process changes internally to reduce emissions are cost prohibitive, they may look to other ways to reduce emissions in a more cost effective manner. This might include investing in an “emissions offset” project which would reduce emissions in a developing nation. The emission reductions that are created due to the project would then be counted as an emission reduction for compliance by that company. Because climate change is a global issue, it theoretically does not matter where the emission reductions take place, as long as they truly take place…
So, if a community forest area in Nepal manages to reduce it’s carbon output through sustainable harvesting practices and they “sell” their emission reductions to a private firm from North America, both parties stand to gain. The Community Forest User Group gains a economic benefit for their sustainable harvesting practice, and the company gets carbon offset credits which help it achieve regulatory compliance at a cheaper rate than investing in costly upgrades to reduce emissions internally. Simple right?? Well, not really, but that will be a discussion for another day. There are always other complicating factors such as risk of project failure or reversal, problems of additionality (whether the project is truly incrementally reducing ghg emissions), project implementation and documentation… the list goes on.
So where does Nepal stand? Well, things are in the fledgling stages, but theoretically there is plenty of opportunity for carbon offset projects including: carbon sequestration through forestry practices, energy efficiency and renewable energy projects (ie. using bio-briquettes for heating, biogas and biodiesel for alternative fuels). There is a great deal of interest currently and projects will have to be initiated on a pilot basis to determine feasibility and cost viability, but there is no doubt as there is increasing worldwide carbon constraints the viability will continue to rise….
That was an education!! I think I will read it again - later - assuming that my head will be clearer.
ReplyDeleteWould it be possible for Nepal to build small reservoirs - sustainably of course. To mitigate the loss of water, including retaining rain water?