Carbon Planet dropped
Date: 18 Feb 2010 Comments: 0

Nupan (HK) Trading Corporation Limited, and Nupan (PNG) Trading Corporation Limited, today announced that they had severed all relationships with Carbon Planet Limited. Kirk Roberts, in a statement released to the media at 1200 hrs ESST, said the following, “Carbon Planet Limited and all and any companies and staff related to Carbon Planet Limited have no right to represent themselves as our Agents, Initiators, Marketers, or Sellers, effective immediately. Any agreement previously entered into by them in their name as it relates to our business or the business of our Clients, is not considered valid by us, and while we are happy to renegotiate any agreement on proper commercial terms directly with any Client company, we are not bound and will not support any commercial activity Carbon Planet Limited may or may not have entered into or concluded in its name while alluding to represent us.

REDD is the pathway to make big money as a middleman. We all know that. So why are you foreigners still pushing it on us instead of starting 1st with demanding that our PM and his cronies open up on their vested personal profit interests?

With regard to Dave Sag’s comment: “vast majority of the funds from the REDD projects we are involved with flow to the people of PNG. ” That’s the point, Dave. You people don’t think that it’s unfair for there to be several middlemen, each taking their 10% ‘commission’ for these carbon trades. In PNG, we’re sick of middlemen because they’ve been ripping us off for donkeys years. Our politicians have seen your role model examples and they each want their 10% too. We’re sick of it.

Thanks for the clarification, and the invitation for follow-up questions, which I would immediately like to take you up on:

1. Whilst you say above that “The Kamula Doso REDD project will be one of the first large scale VCS registered REDD projects”, what do you understand to be the legal situation of the KD project, especially in relation to the extant court order stating that “pursuant to Order 14 Rule 10 of the National Court Rules and Section 155(4) of the Constitution, Dr Theo Yasause and all other officers and employees of the Office of Climate Change and Carbon Trade (as set up under the auspices of the Dept of Prime Minister and NEC) are restrained from dealing with the Timber Rights and/or Carbon Credits of Kamula Doso pending the determination of this Judicial Review”?

As you say above, “no-one does anything related to carbon and REDD in PNG without involvement with the OCCES”, so how is the KD project going to advance when the OCCES has specifically been forbidden by the court from dealing with it as a carbon credit?

2.What is your comment on the view of a study carried out at the University of Canterbury, NZ, that the Voluntary Carbon Standard (VCS) under which your operations will be ‘certified’ is actually the weakest of all the voluntary carbon certification schemes. According to the study, (which is available here – http://www.globalcarbonproject.org/global/pdf/ComparisonClimateForestationProject%20Standards.2008.pdf), the VCS seems to suffer from some substantial defects, which in my view would fail to address some of the concerns about forest carbon trading schemes in PNG. Specifically (and to quote the UoC report):

“Public consultation is not explicitly required for the verification process of a project.” (p12)

“The VCS does not specifically focus on co-benefits [E.g, livelihoods, biodiversity protection, etc]. It regards co-benefits as a positive secondary effect that may lower the risk profile of a project.” (p17)

“Field verification has to be executed only once.” (p24)

“it is hard to understand why credits [generated under the VCS system] would only be cancelled 15 years after a projects fails to submit a self-validation report.” (p26)

3. In relation to point 1 above specifically, but also in relation to the current absence of a legal framework for REDD in PNG, how do you envisage that the Kamula Doso (and other Carbon Planet) projects in PNG will comply with the VCS Standards (version 2007.1, available here: http://www.v-c-s.org/docs/Voluntary%20Carbon%20Standard%202007_1.pdf) requirements that:

- “The VCS [Project Description] shall include notification of relevant local laws and regulations related to the project and demonstrate compliance with them” and;
- “The VCS PD shall be accompanied by Proof of Title, which shall contain one of the following:
• a legislative right;
• a right under local common law;” (both on p15 of the standard)

Thanks very much, and we all look forward to hearing from you.

1. We’ve been working in PNG for a while and naturally no-one does anything related to carbon and REDD in PNG without involvement with the OCCES. That’s a far cry from saying I know what happens inside their office however. Much of the reporting about our work has been, to my mind, ignorant, irresponsible and malicious. A couple of ill-mannered journalists / bloggers have made desperate attempts to smear Carbon Planet by association, juxtaposing stories about CP with stories of co-men who I have no doubt are taking advantage of the hype around REDD and carbon trading. I don’t know what their motives are for this but, of course, there are plenty of very powerful, extremely well funded parties that will stop at nothing to see REDD projects fall at the first hurdle.

You may have heard of the ‘clever cow syndrome’, expressing the concept that it only takes one clever cow to open a gate. The rest can simply follow through it. The Kamula Doso REDD project will be one of the first large scale VCS registered REDD projects. Once sustainable incomes start to flow to the people of KD, other forest areas will soon follow suit. This terrifies those who rely on the status quo and so stopping KD is obviously a priority for them. I’m not describing some sort of conspiracy theory here, just plain old common sense and strategic thinking on the part of those parties. REDD, once it gets going, and proves itself, will be impossible to stop.

2. I am not a lawyer and don’t for a second claim to be able to speak on Mr Roberts’ behalf. I am certainly not an expert in PNG law. I’m sorry if that response seems weak, and it is weak, but it really is the best I can come up with without digging through the PDD and seeking clearance from an expensive army of lawyers.

3. Once again I can’t speak for Mr Roberts but what I assume he means there is the development of the specific REDD methodology and the PDD that documents the KD project is well underway.

Honestly (and yes that’s a rather exasperated ‘honestly’,) if Mr Gridneff knew anything much at all about how REDD projects are developed and registered this would be obvious. I suggest you, and your readers, pop over to http://www.v-c-s.org and take a look at their guidelines, methodologies that have already been approved, and PDDs of projects that have already been approved. We don’t develop the guidelines, we just follow them.

Here’s a few facts to set the record straight on a few points.

Despite claims made in REDD Monitor and other blogs, Carbon Planet has NOT paid money to the PNG Office of Climate Change.

Carbon Planet is not a motley group of so-called ‘carbon cowboys’. It employs scientists (botanists, anthropologists, forestry experts, chemical engineers, and even a forensic archaeologist) as well as top-grade engineers, economists, software developers and other experts. We’ve been involved with carbon management projects for a very long time and have hundreds of happy clients. We win work because of our professionalism, adherence to international standards, our expertise and our excellent reputation in the industry. Carbon Planet is the only full-spectrum carbon management company to have had its services accredited by the Australian Department of Climate Change as ‘Greenhouse Friendly™’.

Carbon Planet operates under a strict ethical code of conduct. It is a public company and thus exposed to the highest degree of transparency and due-diligence. Carbon Planet has defined specific principles guiding our activity with regard to the rights of indigenous peoples.

The vast majority of the funds from the REDD projects we are involved with flow to the people of PNG. Despite some claims in blogs Carbon Planet is not pocketing billions of dollars in REDD credits. CP is a service provider, not a project developer or primary asset owner.

REDD projects are expensive and complex and require large amounts of up-front funding. Despite what other stories in REDD-Monitor may say, REDD projects are not designed to exploit the locals, but reward them for the environmental services their forests provide (currently for free in the absence of REDD mechanisms).

All of the REDD projects Carbon Planet is working on will be independently verified, submitted to the VCSA for approval and registered with the TZ1 registry in New Zealand. The details of the projects will be publicly documented and the documentation, when lodged, will be open for public scrutiny and feedback.

I hope this clears up a few misconceptions. I am happy to take follow-up questions to this comment, or, if REDD-Monitor is genuinely interested, write a more detailed article on Carbon Planet and the work it does.

Cheers

Dave Sag
Founder and Executive Director
Carbon Planet Limited
http://redd.carbonplanet.com