Jeffrey Ball has a point in wondering if developing nations will risk growth for the sake of the environment.

the debate over how to prod emission cuts by industrialized countries is fast being eclipsed by a more-practical question: how to create incentives for the cuts in the developing world.

With China challenging the US in the biggest greenhouse gas emitter stakes, it is no longer sufficient for established economies to cut back. Rising powers such as India will have to make an effort as well. However, these nations aren’t just going to give in:

Developing economies have made clear they aren’t about to subject themselves to emission caps. The West enjoyed its fossil-fueled century of economic growth, they point out. Now it is their turn.

They are certainly entitled to growth, but it doesn’t necessarily have to be through fossil fuels — though these are still the cheapest and easiest way to power an economy.

The carbon credits market hasn’t had the desired effect. It’s worth billions but hasn’t slowed emissions to the level they need to be.

The Kyoto treaty tries to encourage tree-planting in the developing world by letting companies that do it peddle carbon credits — an additional revenue stream. Some forest-rich developing nations want to be able to sell such credits not just for planting new trees, but for preserving existing ones that otherwise might be logged.

While this proposal was rejected as being too open to abuse, it’s something that should be resurrected. Trees are an elemental tool in tackling CO2, as they absorb carbon dioxide and release oxygen. However, in many nations logging clears land for farming as well as being worth a lot of money in its own right.

Lest you think I’m insane, I don’t believe that just planting trees will save the planet. However, it’s just one of many ideas that can make a difference, and it is time all economies took it seriously.

by