Community | September 16, 2009 | 10 comments

World Bank spends billions on coal-fired power stations despite own climate warnings

Image
JanforGore
Well, the key word here is bank. They are not in this for philanthropic reasons. Why people continue to think they serve any other real purpose but to keep developing countries in the developing stage in order to keep the rich countries rich escapes me.

Excerpt:

The World Bank is spending billions of pounds subsidising new coal-fired power stations in developing countries despite claiming that burning fossil fuels exposes the poor to catastrophic climate change. The bank, which has a goal of reducing poverty and is funded by Britain and other developed countries, calls on all nations in a report today to “act differently on climate change”.

It says that the world must reduce its dependence on fossil fuels, but it is funding several giant coal-burning plants that will each emit millions of tonnes of carbon dioxide a year for the next 40 to 50 years.

Britain is contributing £400million to a World Bank fund that claims to support “clean technology” but is financing coal power plants.

The bank’s World Development Report says: “Developing countries are disproportionately affected by climate change — a crisis that is not of their making and for which they are the least prepared. Increasing access to energy and other services using high-carbon technologies will produce more greenhouse gases, hence more climate change.”

The report says that between 75 and 80 per cent of the damage caused by climate change through drought, floods and rising sea levels will happen in developing countries. It calls on richer nations, including Britain, to increase the amount that they spend on helping developing countries to adapt to climate change.

The bank also wants global spending on research and development on sustainable sources of energy to be increased from the present $70billion (£40billion) a year to $700billion.

The report says that unless the world acts now to cut carbon dioxide emissions it faces a 5C (9F) rise in global temperatures by the end of the century. “Such a drastic temperature shift would cause the possible dieback of the Amazon rainforest, complete loss of glaciers in the Andes and Himalayas, and rapid ocean acidification leading to death of coral reefs,” it says.

“The speed and magnitude of change could wipe out more than 50 per cent of species. Sea levels could rise by one metre this century, threatening 60 million people. Agricultural productivity would likely decline throughout the world and over three million additional people could die from malnutrition each year.”

The 260-page report advises against “locking the world into high-carbon infrastructure” but makes no mention of the bank’s plans to subsidise coal power plants in India, South Africa, Botswana and other developing countries.

Last year the bank and its partner, the Asian Development Bank, approved $850million in loans to finance a coal-fired plant in Gujarat, western India.

The Environmental Defence Fund, a US lobby group, said that the plant, the first of nine planned in India, would be one of the biggest new sources of greenhouse gases on Earth, emitting 26.7million tonnes of CO2 a year for the next 50 years.

The bank is also contributing $5billion towards South Africa’s power generation expansion plan, which includes six coal plants.

Marianne Fay, the bank’s chief economist for sustainable development, said that coal was the cheapest and most secure way to deliver electricity to the 1.6billion people without it. She said: “There are a lot of poor countries which have coal reserves and for them it’s the only option.

end of excerpt
  1. groups:
    Community,   Green,   Current Tonight,   Earth and Science,   2 more
  2. tags:
    Environment Climate Change World Bank Coal Kills 2 more
  3.     
    |

10 comments // World Bank spends billions on coal-fired power stations despite own climate warnings

  • ElderGrogh
  • samthesixth
  • JanforGore
  • mypittica
    • 0
      mypittica  
    • I wish there would be a clause that a certain amount of energy & money derived from using coal (which my very well be the only option given the financial circumstances of a developing nation) is used toward developing sustainable energy equipment/knowledge/infrastructure. Solar, wind, hydro all cost an incredible amount which the world bank may or may not be able to afford. Once enough has accumulated designed by formula, then make the change over. Then the developing world has to educate its citizens on different KSAs on renewable energy products and ween off coal. But, then again, on the other hand, exploitation is key to the world bank and industrialized nations.

    • 2 years ago
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  
    • SeaJade, so true. This hasn't penetrated the comfort zones of many yet. And as you stated, people learn one thing and stay with it. And right now that is dangerous to the future sustainability of the planet for humans and other species. In the case of the World Bank as well, it is also about money. That is their comfort zone.

    • 2 years ago
  • hunzedog
  • SeaJade
    • 0
      SeaJade  
    • "Only option...." Some of the missing text might have been "Only option for me that I can see to make a ton of money and the rest of the world be dammed......" (i guess we don't all breathe the same air)

      I once heard the collective human race described as "masters of limitation"... meaning in this case most humans don't or can't think beyond their own little box of existence and societal conditioning, and lack creative thinking and or courage to go beyond that little box of limitation....

    • 2 years ago
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  
    • "Marianne Fay, the bank’s chief economist for sustainable development, said that coal was the cheapest and most secure way to deliver electricity to the 1.6billion people without it. She said: “There are a lot of poor countries which have coal reserves and for them it’s the only option."

      Only option? Has she looked up in the sky of late? What's that bright yellow ball up there? Unbelievable.

    • 2 years ago
more from Community:

top videos