Karbon ticareti ve karbon bankacılığı

Dünya nüfusundaki artısa paralel olarak, dünya ekonomisindeki büyüme çabaları, çevre sorunlarını da beraberinde getirmekte ve ekonomi ile çevre arasında dengesizlik yaratmaktadır. Çevre kirliligindeki artıs, batılı toplumları 1980’lerden itibaren küresel çevreyi korumaya yöneltmistir. Çevreye ilginin artması, ekonomik büyümeyle çevre dengesi arasındaki olumsuzlukları giderici çözümlerin üretilmesine neden olmustur. Bu baglamda gerçeklestirilen karbon tutma atmosferdeki karbonu azaltmada kullanılan yöntemlerden birisidir. Ancak bu yöntemin karbon denklestirme piyasasında (offset market) kullanımı, karbonun dogal olarak geçici tutulma özelligi ve buna baglı olarak piyasaya arz edilmesi ve fiyatının belirlenmesi ile ilgili riskleri içermesinden dolayı güçlesmektedir. Bu çalısmada tüm bu sorunları ele alacak Esuola ve Weersink (2006) tarafından önerilen bir karbon bankası modeli tanıtılmaktadır. Söz konusu modelde banka hem karbon toplayıcı hem de bir risk üstlenici olmaktadır. Yutak alan üreticiler bankaya karbon kredilerini depolamakta, bunun karsılıgında aynı banka aracılıgıyla “karbon tasarruf hesapları” için kendilerine bir ödemede bulunulmaktadır. Karbon bankası aynı zamanda fazla miktarda karbon yayıcıların bankadan geçici ya da kalıcı karbon kredisi satın alabildigi, kredi ve saglanan hizmetler karsılıgı bankaya ödemede bulundugu bir kurumdur. Karbon tutmada ormancılık faaliyetlerine dayalı sistemler bu çalısmada ayrıca ele alınmaktadır. Ormancılıga dayalı karbon tutma sistemi genellikle belirli bir karbon alıcısıyla tek seferlik bir ödeme yapılan bir karbon satıcısını (orman sahibini) eslestirme temeline dayanmaktadır. Bu ise çok genis toprak arazi veya ormanlık alan sahiplerine hitap edebilecek bir karbon tutma sistemi yaratmaktadır. Bu çalısmada ayrıca Bigsby (2009) tarafından önerilen bir karbon bankacılıgı modeli ele alınmaktadır. Söz konusu modelde bir finansal kurumun sermaye arz etmesi gibi karbon bankacılıgı da tutulu karbon arz etmektedir. Esas itibariyle yıllık ödeme karsılıgı orman sahipleri karbon depolar ve karbon dengeleme ihtiyacı duyanlar ise yine yıllık ödeme karsılıgında karbon borçlanırlar. Karbon bankasının görevi karbon depolarını toplamak ve bunları çesitli karbon taleplerini karsılamak için kullanmaktır.

Carbon trading and carbon banking

Efforts of growth in the world economy, as the population of the world increases, accompany some environmental problems, creating an imbalance between economy and environment. Increase in environmental pollution has led the western societies after 1980’s to conservation of the global environ. Growing interest in the environment has induced researches to remove the imbalance between economic growth and environment. To this end, carbon sequestration is one of the options that can be used to reduce atmospheric carbon, but its use in an offset market is complicated by the temporary nature of sequestered carbon and the risks associated with carbon release and price. In this paper, a carbon bank which has been proposed by Esuola and Weersink (2006) is presented to handle these problems. The bank is both an aggregator and a risk bearer. Sink generators deposit their credits with the bank and are paid for maintaining their ‘‘savings’’ with the bank. The carbon bank is also the source where large-scale emitters can come and buy either a temporary or permanent credit and pay the bank in return for the credit and services provided. The focus of forest-based systems for sequestering carbon has largely been on creating permanent stores of carbon on defined areas of land with a single payment to the forest owner for the carbon. In terms of forest management, this focus leads to two outcomes, continuing production of timber if the forest area is sufficiently large to create an effective permanent carbon pool, or a cessation of harvesting if the forest area is too small. In addition, the payment system for carbon is generally based on matching a specific buyer and seller of carbon using a single payment to the forest owner. The paper presents an alternative system for carbon sequestration; carbon banking has been outlined by Bigsby (2009). Carbon banking treats sequestered carbon in the same way that a financial institution treats capital. In essence, forest owners ‘deposit’ carbon, in exchange for an annual payment, and those who need carbon offsets ‘borrow' carbon by making an annual payment. The role of the carbon bank is to aggregate deposits of carbon and use these to meet various demands for carbon. The advantages of the bank over alternative institutional designs include lower transaction costs, flexible carbon credits and price, and lower risk to risk averse parties.

PDF

___

Antle, J., and B. McCarl. 2001. The economics of carbon sequestration in agricultural soils. p. 278-310. In T. Tietenberg and H. Folmer (ed.) The international yearbook of environmental and resource economics. Edward Elgar Publ., Cheltenham, UK.

Anonim 2006: Orman Varlıgımız. Çevre ve Orman Bakanlıgı, Orman Genel Müdürlügü Yayını, http://www.ogm.gov.tr/orm_var.htm

Bigsby, Hugh, 2009. Carbon banking: Creating flexibility for forest owners, Forest Ecology and Management 257 (2009) 378-383.

Bosetti, V., Carraro, C, Massetti, E., 2008. Banking Permits: Economic Efficiency and Distributional Effects. CESifo Working Paper Series No. 2214.

Carbon Finance, 2008. Minimum Project Requirements. Retrieved from http://carbonfinance.org/Router.cfm?Page= MinReqs&ItemID=24689.

Cacho, O., Lipper, L, 2007. Abatement and Transaction Costs of Carbon-sink Projects Involving Smallholders. Nota Di Lavoro 27.2007. Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).

Cathcart, J.F., 2000. Carbon sequestration. Journal of Forestry 98 (9), 32-37.

Cheung, S.N.S. 1969. Transaction costs, risk aversion, and the choice of contractual arrangements. J. Law Econ. 12(1):23-42.

Chicago Climate Exchange, 2008a. Overview. Retrieved on January 27, 2008 from http://www.chicagoclimatex. com/.

Chicago Climate Exchange, 2008b. CFI Contract Specifications. Retrieved on January 27, 2008 from http://www.chicagoclimatex.com/content.jsf?id=483.

Chomitz, K.M., 2000. Evaluating Carbon Offsets from Forestry and Energy Projects: How do they Compare? World Bank.

Chomitz, K.M., Lecocq, F., 2003. Temporary Sequestration Credits: An Instrument for Carbon Bears. Wold Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3181.

Çiftçi, Mustafa, Küresel Isınma Ve Orman Kaynakları Üzerine Etkileri, www.ogm.gov.tr/iklim/kuresel_isinma_ orman.doc

Çikot, Özcan, AVRUPA’DA KARBON VE ENERJI BORSALARI, Sermaye Piyasasında GüNDeM, SAYI 82 HAZIRAN 2009, 9–24.

ÇOB– Çevre ve Orman Bakanlıgı, (2008) “Kyoto Protokolü Esneklik Mekanizmaları ve Diger Uluslararası Emisyon Ticareti Sistemleri”, Çevre ve Orman Bakanlıgı Özel Ihtisas Komisyonu Raporu, ss. 1-43.

Can, Oguz (2008), Küresel ve Türk Gönüllü Karbon Piyasaları ve Uygulamaları, Yenilenebilir Enerji Finansmanı Ve Karbon Piyasaları Semineri, ISTAC, 1–27.

DPT, (2010), Gönüllü Emisyon Ticaretinden Türkiye’nin Kazanımları, Devlet Planlama Teskilatı Müstesarlıgı, http://www.dpt.gov.tr/DocObjects/View/7784/G%C3%B6n%C3%BCll%C3%BC_Emisyon_Ticaretinden_ T%C3%BCrkiye’nin_Kazan%C4%B1mlar%C4%B1.pdf, 19.01.2010.

Dutschke, M., 2002. Fractions of permanence—squaring the cycle of sink carbon accounting. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 7, 381-402.

Ellis, J., 2001. Forestry Projects: Permanence, Credit Accounting and Lifetime. OECD and IEA Information Paper COM/ENV/EPOC/IEA/SLT(2001)11.

Eusola, A.G., Weersink, A., 2006. Carbon banks: an efficient means to exchange sequestered carbon. Journal of Environmental Quality 35, 1525-1532.

Feng, H., J. Zhao, and C.L. Kling. 2002. The time path and im-plementation of carbon sequestration. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 84(1): 134–149.

GTE (Global Tan Enerji), Karbon Ticareti Sertifikasyonu Yatırımlarda Yeni Bir Kaynak: Yeni Fırsat, http://www.gte.com.tr/presentations/GTE-karbon-ticareti-sertifikasyonu.pdf

GTE (Global Tan Enerji), 2009, Iklim Degisikligi ve Karbon Ticareti, 28.04.2009, Muradiye Marmaris, MUGLA, http://www.gte.com.tr/presentations/GTE-iklim-degisikligi-ve-karbon-ticareti.ppt

Hamburg, S.P., 2000. Simple rules for measuring changes in ecosystem carbon in forestry-offset projects. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 5, 25-37.

Katila, M., Puustja¨rvi, E., n.d. 2003. Impact of New Markets for Environmental Services on Forest Products Trade. Report for FAO Impact Assessment of Forest Products Trade in the Promotion of Sustainable Forest Management (GCP/INT/775/JPN).

Kerr, S., 2003. Efficient Contracts for Carbon Credits From Reforestation Projects. MOTU Working Paper #03- 12, MOTU, Wellington.

Koçyigit, Rasim, “Karasal Ekosistemde Karbon Yönetimi ve Önemi”, GOÜ. Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 2008, 25 (1), 81-85.

Korucu, T., V. Kirisci, S. Görücü, Korumalı Toprak Isleme ve Türkiye’deki Uygulamaları, Tarımsal Mekanizasyon 18. Ulusal kongresi Tekirdag, 321–333.

Kosar, Fatma. Zehir Borsası, 30 Haziran 2008, Cumhuriyet Gazetesi. Lal, R., L.M. Kimble, R.F. Follet, and C.V. Cole. 1998. The potential of US cropland to sequester C and mitigate the greenhouse effect. Ann Arbor Press. Chelsea, MI.

Lewandrowski, J., Peters, M., Jones, C, House, R., 2004. Economics of Sequestering Carbon in the U.S. Agricultural Sector. USDA ERS Technical Bulletin Number 1909.

MAF, 2007. Permanent Forest Sink Initiative Bulletin, Issue 5. Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Wellington, September 2007. Retrieved on February 4, 2008 from http://www.maf.govt.nz/forestry/pfsi/bulletin/issue-5/index. htm.

Marechal, K., Hecq, W., 2006. Temporary credits: a solution to the potential non-permanence of carbon sequestration in forests? Ecological Economics 58, 699-716.

Marland, G., Fruit, K., Sedjo, R., 2001b. Accounting for sequestered carbon: the question of permanence. Environmental Science and Policy 4, 259-268.

McCarl, B., and U. Schneider. 2000. U.S. agriculture’s role in a greenhouse gas emission mitigation world: An economic perspec-tive. Rev. Agric. Econ. 22(1):134–159.

Milliyet, “60 Milyar Dolarlık Karbon Pazarında 3 Türk Sirketi” 19.02.2008. Ministry for the Environment, 2007. The Framework for a New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme. Ministry for the Environment, Wellington.

NSW, 2008. Greenhouse Gas Reduction Scheme. Retrieved on February 4, 2008 from http://www.greenhousegas. nsw.gov.au/.

Öztürk, Mustafa, (2009), Gönüllü Karbon Ticareti, http://www.mozturk.net/Upload/karbon.pdf

Pamukçu, Konuralp, 2007, küresel emisyon ticareti sistemi için bir model: avrupa birligi emisyon ticareti programı, I.Ü. Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi, No: 37 (Ekim 2007) 17–42.

Parkinson, S., Begg, K., Bailey, P., Jackson, T., 1999. JI/CDM crediting under the Kyoto Protocol: does ‘interim period banking’ help or hinder GHG emissions reduction? Energy Policy 27, 129–136.

Referans Gazetesi, Küresel iklim degisikligi yeni bir finansman modeli yarattı, (24.09.2009)

Sedjo, R.A., Marland, G., Fruit, K., 2001. Renting Carbon Offsets: the Question of Permanence. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC.

Sedjo, R.A., Marland, G., Fruit, K., 2002. Carbon emissions offset trading: a tradable permit system for temporary carbon sequestered. Paper presented atConcerted Action for Tradable Emissions Permits Workshop on the Design and Integration of National Tradable Permit Schemes for Environmental Protection, University College London March 25–26, 2002.

Sedjo, R.A., Marland, G., 2003. Inter-trading permanent emissions credits and rented temporary carbon emissions offsets: some issues and alternatives. Climate Policy 3 (4), 435–444.

Sohngen, B., Mendelson, R., 2003. An optimal control model of forest carbon sequestration. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 85 (2), 448–457.

Sun, B., Sohngen, B., 2007. Optimal set-asides for carbon sequestration and co-benefits of forestry. Paper presented at the Conference on the Economics of Climate Change and Sustainable Development, Chia, Sardinia, September 27 and 28, 2007.

State Forests NSW, 2004. Generating Carbon Benefits from Public and Privately Owned Forests. Forest Facts. Retrieved on February 4, 2008 from www.forest.nsw.gov.au/ publication/forest_facts/carbon/carbon_fs.pdf (February 23, 2004).

Stevens, B., and A. Rose. 2002. A dynamic analysis of the marketable permits approach to global warming policy: A comparison of spatial and temporal flexibility. J. Environ. Econ. Manage. 44: 45–69.

Tasdan, 2009, “Gönüllü Karbon Piyasasında Talep ve Projeler”, Ankara, Ekim28th, 2009, FutureCamp Türkiye.

Tavoni, M., Sohngen, B., Bosetti, V., 2007. Forestry and the carbon market response to stabilize climate. Energy Policy 35, 5346–5353.

The Gold Standard, Premium Quality Carbon Credits, Status of GS Projects in Turkey, (http://www.cdmgoldstandard. org/)2010-10-05

Van Kooten, G. C., Sohngen, 2007. Economics of forest ecosystem carbon sinks: a review. International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics 1, 237–269.

Van Kooten, G. C., 2004. Climate Change Economics: Why International Accords Fail. Edward Elgar Publishing, 167 pp.

Williams, J.R., Peterson, J.M., Mooney, S., 2005. The value of carbon credits: is there a final answer. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 60 (2), 36–40.

Yamanoglu, G. Ç. (2002) Türkiye’de Küresel Isınmaya Yol Açan Sera Gazı Emisyonlarında Artıs ile Mücadelede Iktisadi Araçların Rolü. Yayınlanmamıs Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. www.cdmgoldstandart.org