Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research 24 (8): 2624-2631, 2016

ISSN 1990-9233
IDOSI Publications, 2016
DOI: 10.5829/idosi.mejsr.2016.24.08.23826

Carbon Trading and its Impact in Bangladesh

Mahfuza Afroj, 2 Md. Mahfuzar Rahman,
3
Mohammad Mizanul Haque Kazal and 2Md. Quamruzzaman
1

Department of Agribusiness and Marketing, Faculty of Agribusiness management,

Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University, Sher-e-Bangla Nagar, Dhaka-1207, Bangladesh
2
Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture, Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University,
Sher-e-Bangla Nagar, Dhaka-1207, Bangladesh
3
Department of Development and Poverty Studies, Faculty of Agribusiness management,
Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University, Sher-e-Bangla Nagar, Dhaka-1207, Bangladesh
1

Abstract: With the start of industrial revolution in the middle of the 19th century, carbon dioxide emissions in
our atmosphere have increased steadily and dramatically. It has a dramatic impact on our climate, both warming
our climate and altering our weather with more droughts and more very extreme weather events. To control the
carbon emission and environment pollution, carbon trading plays a very important role. Carbon emissions
trading is a market-based approach used to control pollution by providing economic incentives for achieving
reductions in the emissions of pollutants. This paper mainly depends on the secondary data. Different
published reports of different journals mainly supported in providing data in this paper. This paper is
completely a review paper. Carbon emissions trading have been steadily increasing in recent years. According
to the World Bank's Carbon Finance Unit, 374 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO 2e) were
exchanged through projects in 2005,a 240% increase relative to 2004 (110 mtCO 2e) which was itself a 41%
increase relative to 2003(78 mt CO2e). Carbon trading helps to reduce the emission of carbon and manage energy
cost. In December 1997, Bangladesh along with 160 other countries, completed negotiations at the third session
of Conference of Parties (COP3) at Kyoto Japan to finalize a protocol subsequently known as the Kyoto
Protocol. The carbon trading, which has taken for reducing carbon emission is not better for Bangladesh as it
has emitted only 0.3% and its yearly emission is 46527 thousand per metric ton. Only the developed countries
are benefited and they have not reduced their emission to keep their living standard high and to keep the faster
growth of industrialization in a stable condition.
Key words: CO2

COP3

Kyoto Protocol

Bangladesh

INTRODUCTION
Climate change is real, we are all responsible for it
and we all must be part of the solution of it. Since the
Industrial Revolution started in the middle of the 19th
century, carbon dioxide emissions in our atmosphere have
increased steadily and dramatically from the burning of
fossil fuels, namely coal, oil and gas and to a lesser degree
from methane and industrial gases. This increase in CO2
from roughly 280 parts per million (ppm) prior to the
Industrial Revolution to about 392 ppm today is having a
dramatic impact on our climate, both warming our climate

and altering our weather with more droughts and more

very extreme weather events. Our sea levels are rising and
entire countries are at risk of disappearing. If the
Greenland glaciers fail, global sea levels could rise by 20
feet, swamping low level areas around the world,
including Florida and Manhattan, causing global
catastrophe. The cause of climate change is manmade.
And we must solve the problem by reducing our
emissions by 50-85% globally by midcentury. Breaking
down the problem, this does not need to be an
insurmountable task. Reducing our emissions just 2% per
year would do it. Carbonfund.org helps individuals and

Corresponding Author: Mahfuza Afroj, Department of Agribusiness and Marketing, Faculty of Agribusiness Management,
Sher-e-Bangla Agricultural University, Sher-e-Bangla Nagar, Dhaka-1207, Bangladesh.

2624

Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 24 (8): 2624-2631, 2016

businesses understand climate change and develop

practical and cost-effective solutions to slow, stop and
reduce our climate crisis. They have introduced a program
to reduce carbon emission that is called carbon trading.
According to the economists is cost effective also.
Considering the above facts, the present study was
undertaken to know about the carbon trading, to be
acquainted with the effect of carbon trading and to know
the present scenario of carbon trading and its impact in
Bangladesh.

There are active trading programs in several air

pollutants. For greenhouse gases the largest is the
European Union Emission Trading Scheme, whose
purpose is to avoid dangerous climate change. In the
United States there is a national market to reduce acid rain
and several regional markets in nitrogen oxides. Markets
for other pollutants tend to be smaller and more localized.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Scientific approach requires a close understanding of
the subject matter. This paper mainly depends on the
secondary data. Different published reports of different
journals mainly supported in providing data in this paper.
This paper is completely a review paper. Therefore no
specific method has been followed in preparing this paper.
It has been prepared by Internet search, comprehensive
studies of various articles published in different journals,
books and proceedings. Valuable information has been
collected through personal contact with respective
resource personnel to enrich the paper. It compiled the all
related information to prepare this paper.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Basic Concept of Carbon Emission Trading: Carbon
emissions trading is a market-based approach used to
control pollution by providing economic incentives
for achieving reductions in the emissions of
pollutants.
A central authority (usually a governmental body)
sets a limit or cap on the amount of a pollutant that may
be emitted. The limit or cap is allocated or sold to firms in
the form of emissions permits which represent the right to
emit or discharge a specific volume of the specified
pollutant. Firms are required to hold a number of permits
(or allowances or carbon credits) equivalent to their
emissions. The total number of permits cannot exceed the
cap, limiting total emissions to that level. Firms that need
to increase their volume of emissions must buy permits
from those who require fewer permits.
The transfer of permits is referred to as a trade. In
effect, the buyer is paying a charge for polluting, while the
seller is being rewarded for having reduced emissions.
Thus, in theory, those who can reduce emissions most
cheaply will do so, achieving the pollution reduction at
the lowest cost to society.

Kyoto Protocol and Carbon Trade: As the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
reports came in over the years, they shed abundant light
on the true state of global warming and they gave support
to the environmental effort to address this unprecedented
problem. However, the same discussions that started
decades back had never ceased and the crusade for a
tangible solution to global climate change had gone on
all the while. In 1997 the Kyoto Protocol was adopted.
The Kyoto Protocol is a 1997 international treaty that
came into force in 2005. In the treaty, most developed
nations agreed to legally binding targets for their
emissions of the six major greenhouse gases. Emission
quotas (known as "Assigned amounts") were agreed by
each participating country, with the intention of reducing
the overall emissions by 5.2% from their 1990 levels by the
end of 2012. The United States is the only industrialized
nation that has not ratified the treaty and is therefore not
bound by it. The IPCC has projected that the financial
effect of compliance through trading within the Kyoto
commitment period will be limited at between 0.11.1percent of GDP among trading countries.
The Protocol defines several mechanisms ("flexible
mechanisms") that are designed to allow countries to meet
their emission reduction commitments (caps) with reduced
economic impact [1].
Under Article 3.3 of the Kyoto Protocol, some parties
may use GHG removals, from afforestation and
reforestation (forest sinks) and deforestation (sources)
since 1990, to meet their emission reduction commitments.
Those parties may also use International Emissions
Trading (IET). Under the treaty, for the 5-year compliance
period from 2008 until 2012, nations that emit less than
their quota will be able to sell assigned amount units to
nations that exceed their quotas. It is also possible for
these countries to sponsor carbon projects that reduce
greenhouse gas emissions in other countries. The projectbased Kyoto Mechanisms are the Clean Development
Mechanism (CDM) and Joint Implementation (JI).
Economics of Carbon Trading: Emissions trading works
by setting a quantitative limit on the emissions produced
by emitters. The economic basis for emissions trading is
linked to the concept of property rights.

2625

Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 24 (8): 2624-2631, 2016

Cost and Valuation of Carbon Trade: The economic

problem with climate change is that the emitters of
greenhouse gases (GHGs) do not face the full cost
implications of their actions. There are costs that emitters
do face, e.g., the costs of the fuel being used, but there
are other costs that are not necessarily included in the
price of a good or service. These other costs are called
external costs. They are "external" because they are costs
that the emitter does not face. External costs may affect
the welfare of others. In the case of climate change, GHG
emissions affect the welfare of people living in the future,
as well as affecting the natural environment. These
external costs can be estimated and converted in a
common (monetary) unit. The argument for doing this is
that these external costs can then be added to the private
costs that the emitter faces. In doing this, the emitter faces
the full (social) costs of their actions.
Market Trend of Carbon Trade: Carbon emissions
trading have been steadily increasing in recent years.
According to the World Bank's Carbon Finance Unit, 374
million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2e)
were exchanged through projects in 2005,a 240% increase
relative to 2004 (110 mt CO2e) which was itself a 41%
increase relative to 2003(78 mt CO2e). The increasing costs
of permits have had the effect of increasing costs of
carbon emitting fuels and activities. Based on a survey of
12 European countries, it was concluded that an increase
in carbon and fuel prices of approximately ten percent
would result in a short-run increase in electrical power
prices of roughly eight percent. This would suggest that
a lowering cap on carbon emissions will likely lead to an
increase in the costs of alternative power sources.
Whereas a sudden lowering of a carbon emission cap may
prove detrimental to economies, a gradual lowering of the
cap may risk future environmental damage via global
warming. In 2010 Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX) has
ceased its trading of carbon emissions.
Business Reaction of Carbon Trade: With the creation of
a market for mandatory trading of carbon dioxide
emissions within the Kyoto Protocol, the London financial
marketplace has established itself as the center of the
carbon finance market and is expected to have grown into
a market valued at $60 billion in 2007. The voluntary offset
market, by comparison, is projected to grow to about $4bn
by 2010. Twenty three multinational corporations came
together in the G8 Climate Change Roundtable, a business
group formed at the January 2005 World Economic Forum.
The group included Ford, Toyota, British Airways, BP

and Unilever. On 9 June 2005, the Group published a

statement stating that there was a need to act on climate
change and stressing the importance of market-based
solutions. It called on governments to establish "clear,
transparent and consistent price signals" through
"creation of a long-term policy framework" that would
include all major producers of greenhouse gases. By
December 2007, this had grown to encompass 150 global
businesses. Business in the UK has come out strongly in
support of emissions trading as a key tool to mitigate
climate change, supported by Green NGOs.
Effect of Carbon Trade: The gradual warming of Earth due
to growing concentrations of greenhouse gasses like
carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could bring about
dramatic ecological and environmental changes. Floods in
some areas, desertification in others and a loss of coastal
land area due to sea level rise are just a few of the
possible consequences of a warmer Earth. To head off
possible disaster, politicians the world over have
contemplated various programs, including a carbon
trading system, aimed at reducing carbon output from
factories, power utilities and the transportation sector.
However it has both positive and negative effect:
Reduction Of Carbon Emission: The goal of carbon
trading systems is to first cap allowed emissions at a
certain level determined by various government agencies
and study groups. These allowances can either be given
for free or auctioned to heavily polluting industries.
In order to comply with the cap, big emitters must either
upgrade systems and equipment to operate more cleanly,
or purchase carbon credits on an open exchange to cover
the variance. The system is meant to create a disincentive
to pollute by making it more expensive than cleaning up
the operation. Companies that move early on cleanup
efforts will have excess carbon allowances, which they
can then sell to dirtier companies on the open market.
The Waxman-Markey bill, passed by the U.S. House of
Representatives in June 2009, relies on this system to
reduce carbon emissions by 17 percent in 2020 and by 83
percent in 2050. The bill is formally known as the
American Clean Energy and Security Act.
Marginal Increase in Energy Cost : The United States'
Republican Party issued dire warnings prior to the
passage of Waxman-Markey that the bill would raise
energy costs for families by $3,100 per year, a claim rated
pants on fire by Politick, a nonpartisan fact-checking
organization. The basis for the ratings was that the author

2626

Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 24 (8): 2624-2631, 2016

of the 2007 MIT study on which the claim relied disowned

that figure and claimed Republicans had misinterpreted
his initial findings. The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency concluded that consumers would spend an
average of $80 to $111 per year in added costs if the bill
passed, most of which would be incurred later in the life
of the program as free carbon allowances were phased
out. The Congressional Budget Office, the nonpartisan
department tasked with estimated the cost of legislation,
put the number at $175 per household on average, noting
that less affluent consumers would actually save money
while the wealthy would bear an additional $235 to $340
annually.
Fraud: Scandal rocked the European Union in 2009 when
it was discovered that perhaps 90 percent of the carbon
permit trading was fraudulent, costing EU governments
more than $7 in tax revenue. Carbon credits sold on the
market are considered taxable services and subject to the
value-added tax, or VAT. The fraudsters perpetrated a
scheme that allowed them to purchase and transfer carbon
credits to another country, bypassing the VAT, then
shuttling those credits back to the original market and
selling them through unregulated brokers, according to
Europol, the European Union police agency. They
collected VAT on the sale, then simply disappeared with
the money. This was, according to Europol, a glitch in the
function of the carbon market since the time of its
beginning until the fraud was discovered.
Incentives and Allocation: Emissions trading give
polluters an incentive to reduce their emissions. However,
there are possible perverse incentives that can exist in
emissions trading. Allocating permits on the basis of past
emissions ("grandfathering") can result in firms having an
incentive to maintain emissions. For example, a firm that
reduced its emissions would receive fewer permits in the
future. This problem can also be criticized on ethical
grounds, since the polluter is being paid to reduce
emissions. On the other hand, a permit system where
permits are auctioned rather than given away provides the
government with revenues. These revenues might be
used to improve the efficiency of overall climate policy,
e.g., by funding reductions in distortionary taxes.
Global Carbon Emission: As is well-known by now, the
concentration of so-called greenhouse gases (GHGs) in
the earths atmosphere have increased markedly as a
result of human activities since 1750. It is possible to
distinguish between four GHGs: (i) carbon dioxide (CO2),

(ii) methane (CH4), (iii) nitrous oxide (N2O) and (iv)

F-gases, which during 1970-2004 amounted, respectively,
to 76.7 percent, 14.3 percent, 7.9 percent and 1.1 percent.1
While the concentration of all four types of GHGs has
increased in the atmosphere, the focus has been on CO2,
as it constitutes due to its large share the most important
GHG. The Fourth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [1] states that
the concentration of CO2, increased from a pre-industrial
value of about 280 parts per million (ppm) to 379 ppm in
2005. This implies an increase of 35 percent in the
concentration level. While this increase in the
concentration level may not seem to be very large, fact is
that relatively small changes in the concentration level of
GHGs have significant impacts on the earths temperature.
Looking at the level of emissions instead of concentration
levels, global CO 2 emissions nearly doubled in the last 40
years. This is shown in Figure 1 for selected years from
1970 to 2004.
Bangladesh, which is one of the worlds poorest
countries, emitted about one tenth of the worlds CO 2
emissions in 2006, despite the fact that its 160 million
people represent about 2.4 percent of the worlds
population.2 The reason for Bangladeshs low CO 2
emissions is due to Bangladeshs low energy
consumption, amounting in per capita terms to only about
one twentieth of the world average per capita electricity
consumption, which is due to Bangladeshs low income
per capita level of $470.3 Though there are many studies
projecting global, regional and country-specific CO2
emissions but there is only one study Azad et al. [2] that
has provided some simple projections for Bangladeshs
future CO 2 emissions.
Azad et al. [2] analyzed Bangladeshs energy
consumption and estimated its CO 2 emission from
combustion of fossil fuel (coal, gas and petroleum
products) for the period of 1977 to 1995. They showed
that the consumption of fossil fuels in Bangladesh has
been growing by more than 5 percent per year during their
observation period. The proportion of natural gas in total
energy consumption has been increasing, while that of
petroleum products and coal has been decreasing.
They estimated that the total CO2 release from all primary
fossil fuels used in Bangladesh amounted to 5.07 million
tons (Mt) in 1977 and to 14.4 Mt in 1995. They then
projected Bangladeshs CO2 emission based on the 19771995 trends, which resulted in a projection of 293 Mt of
CO2 emissions in 2070. While no adjustments have been
made for increasing energy efficiency, the projections
have assumed that Bangladeshs future electricity

2627

Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 24 (8): 2624-2631, 2016

Fig. 1: Annual Global Anthropogenic GHG Emissions, 1970-2004

Source: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) [1]

Fig. 2: Past and future trend of carbon emission

Source: World Bank, 2010 [3]
generation will increasingly be based on natural gas and
that the use of petroleum and coal would continue to
decrease gradually
Situation of Carbon Emission in Bangladesh: Figure 2
provides Bangladeshs CO2 emissions for the benchmark,
high-growth and low-growth scenarios and the
assumptions that there will be no improvements (and no
deteriorations)
in
Bangladeshs
energy
efficiency/intensity. As expected, the projections show
sharp increases in CO2 emissions due to a sharply
increasing energy demand by the growing and more
affluent population.

To give some perspective on these projections:

The projected 2050 level of the benchmark scenario
(628 Mt of CO2 emissions) is about one tenth of what
the United States is currently emitting with an only
slightly higher population than what Bangladesh is
projected to have in 2050;22
The projected 2050 level of the high-growth
scenario (913 Mt of CO2 emissions) is about 16
percent of what the United States is currently
emitting.
The projected 2050 level of the low growth scenario
(431 Mt of CO2 emissions) is less than 5 percent of
what the United States is currently emitting.

2628

Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 24 (8): 2624-2631, 2016

All of our projections imply far higher emission levels

than what Azad et al. [2] projected based on the 19771995 emission trends (293 Mt of CO2 emissions in 2070).
This is mostly due to our far higher assumptions for
Bangladeshs GDP growth. The average 1977-1995 GDP
growth rate (in constant US$) was only 3.9 percent, hence
about 3 percent below our benchmark scenario.
From the figure we can see that, the trend of carbon
emission is gradually increasing. It is a danger sign for us
as it is a major reason for climate change. But the trend is
not much more dangerous as it is very small portion of
total worlds emission. For the rapid climate change
developed countries are more responsible than small
countries like Bangladesh. But they have not reduces
their emission yet. They are not agreeing to reduce their
emission as it will hamper their industrialization as well as
development and will reduce their standard of living.
They have not signed in the last Kyoto Protocol also
where Bangladesh has played more important role and it
shows excellent performance to protect environment as
well as our world.
Carbon Emission from Different Sources
Emission from Vehicles: One of the major sources of air
pollution in urban areas of Bangladesh is due to the
unburned fuel from two stroke engine vehicles. Dhaka has
been rated as one of the most polluted cities of the world.
Bangladesh Atomic Energy Commission reports that
automobiles in Dhaka emit 100 kg lead, 3.5 tons SPM,
1.5 tons SO2, 14 tons HC and 60 tons CO in every day.
The contribution of air pollution by different types of
vehicle and the amount of pollutants emitted from
vehicles in Dhaka city is as follows:
Type of Vehicle CO (%) HC (%) NOx (%) PM (%) Annual Growth
13.4
10.3
7.3
6.3
38.2
10.6
14.0

8.6
9.7
3.9
4.4
18.2
26.9
28.3

59.7
18.5
6.5
2.8
6.5
6.0
0.3

47.5
29.4
19.1
0.7
1.2
1.2
1.0

Table 2: Comparison of CO2 emission from brick kilns in 2002, 2005,

2007 and 2010

Location

Years
------------------------------------------------------------------2002
2005
2007
2010

Dhaka
Chittagonj
Rajshahi
Khulna
Sylet
Barisal
Total

2.846
2.046
1.68
1.114
0.55
0.59
8.826

3.021
2.302
1.97
1.175
0.97
0.61
10.048

3.65
2.925
2.66
1.852
0.983
0.713
12.783

4.756
3.925
2.721
1.937
1.072
0.812
15.25

Source: Imran et al. (2014) [5]

Death of People Caused by Pollution: Many people died

every year in many diseases due to environmental
pollution. The death rate in the year 1996 mainly due to
environmental pollution is as follows.
Table 3: The death rate in the year 1996 due to environmental pollution
Causes of Death
National Level
Dhaka City
Death: All Ages (%)
Cardiovascular
7.87
17.5
Asthma
5.2
4.3
Diarrhea
1.66
7.8
Cancer
4.05
5.3
Dysentery
4.05
5.5
Viral Hepatitis
2.14
3.4
Death: Less than One Year Infant (%)
Anemia
4.77
6.5
Breathing problem
1.87
2.8
Diarrhea
18.96
17.5
Cancer
4.05
5.0
Dysentery
1.66
3.9
Viral Hepatitis
2.14
3.4
Source: BBS, 2001[6]

Table 1: Contribution of Air Pollution by Vehicle Type

Truk
Bus
Mini bus
Utility
Car
Three wheeler
Motor cycle

1, in the year of 2002, 2005, 2007 and 2010, respectively.

It shows that, the increasing rate of CO2 emission in all
of those years simultaneously around Bangladesh.
The above result concludes that CO 2 emission rate are
increasing day by day.

7.8
2.5
6.8
10.2
9.4
31.0
8.1

Source: Country Profile on Environment of Bangladesh by Japan

International Cooperation Agency in the Year 1999 [4].

Total CO2 Emission from Brick Kilns: Total annual

amount of CO2 emission for six divisions are presented in
this table. It has been found that total annual amount of
CO2 emission for 4 types brick kilns from Dhaka,
Chittagong, Rajshahi, Khulana, Sylhet and Barisal are
8.862 Mt yr-1, 10.048 Mt yr-1, 12.783 Mt yr-1, 15.250 Mtyr-

Carbon Trading in Bangladesh: The carbon trading is a

way to reduce carbon emission. In December 1997,
Bangladesh along with 160 other countries, completed
negotiations at the third session of Conference of Parties
(COP3) at Kyoto Japan to finalize a protocol subsequently
known as the Kyoto Protocol. This protocol includes
reduction targets and time table for six greenhouse gases.
The gases are: carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide,
hydrofluro carbons, perfluoro carbons and sulphur
hexafluoride. To reduce the emission the carbon trading
has introduced. But it is not much more beneficial for
Bangladesh as its emission is very low but the impact of
climate change is very alarming.

2629

Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 24 (8): 2624-2631, 2016

Impact of Carbon Trade in Bangladesh: Bangladesh is a

developing country. It is a small country also. Its South
portion is surrounded by Bay of Bangle. It possesses
thousands of rivers. So it is called land of river.
The climate is changing day by day. The reasons for
changing climate like, deforestation, emission of
carbon, increasing pollution etc. has also increased.
The carbon trading, which has taken for reducing carbon
emission is not better for Bangladesh as it has emitted
only 0.3% and its yearly emission is 46527 thousand per
metric ton. The impact that can be seen in Bangladesh
may be:

In China some companies started artificial production

of greenhouse gases with sole purpose of their recycling
and gaining carbon credits. Similar practices happened in
India. Earned credit was then sold to companies in US and
Europe.
Critics of carbon trading, such as Carbon Trade
Watch, argue that it places disproportionate emphasis on
individual lifestyles and carbon footprints, distracting
attention from the wider, systemic changes and collective
political action that needs to be taken to tackle climate
change.
Recommendations: From my point of view Bangladesh
can follow the followings:
Bangladesh can follow Kyoto flexible mechanism like
Clean Development Mechanism(CDM)
It can increase the total forest lands which can
automatically absorbed carbon dioxide.
It can use environment friendly techniques in the
industries.
It can recycle the waste than dispose in environment.
It can stop using tree as fuel by using bio gas.
It can use Joint Initiative (JI) project.

No gain from carbon trading, as its emission

contributes only 16% of total worlds carbon
emission.
Its industrial development can be hampered.
It will not earn any revenue, developed countries
become more benefited.
Bangladesh can be benefited in one way that is, for
this trading many developed countries may invest in
Bangladesh in:
Afforestation
Using environment friendly technologies.
Using better equipment to deplete any resource.

CONCLUSION

Criticism of Carbon Trading: One criticism of carbon

trading is that it is a form of colonialism, where rich
countries maintain their levels of consumption while
getting credit for carbon savings in inefficient industrial
project. Nations that have fewer financial resources may
find that they cannot afford the permits necessary for
developing an industrial infrastructure, thus inhibiting
these countries economic development. Other criticisms
include the questionable level of sustainable development
promoted by the Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development
Mechanism.
Another criticism is of non-existent emission
reductions produced in the Kyoto Protocol due to the
surplus ("hot air") of allowances that some countries
have. For example, Russia has a surplus of allowances due
to its economic collapse following the end of the Soviet
Union. Other countries could buy these allowances from
Russia, but this would not reduce emissions. Rather, it
would simply be a redistribution of emissions allowances.
In practice, Kyoto Parties have as yet chosen not to buy
these surplus allowances.

Carbon trading is very burning issues in the world. It

is very profitable for developed countries. It can help to
reduce carbon emission in the world. But in practice it
has collapsed. As the more victim countries of the
climate change are not benefited by it. They have
not earned much benefit from it. Only the developed
countries are benefited and they have not reduced
their emission to keep their living standard high and to
keep the faster growth of industrialization in a stable
condition.
REFERENCES
1.

2.

2630

IPCC, 2007.Contribution of Working Groups I, II and

III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Core
Writing Team, Pachauri, R.K. and Reisinger, A. (Eds.)
IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, pp: 104.
Azad, A.K., S.W. Nashreen and J. Sultana, 2006. State
of energy consumption and CO 2 emission in
Bangladesh, A Journal of the Human Environment,
35(2): 86-88.

Middle-East J. Sci. Res., 24 (8): 2624-2631, 2016

3.

4.

World Bank, 2010. World Development Report 2010:

Development and Climate Change. The International
Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the
World Bank, 1818 H Street NW, Washington DC
20433.
Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA),
1999. Nibancho Center Building 5-25, Niban-cho,
Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo, pp: 102-8012.

5.

6.

2631

Imran, M.A., M.A. Baten, B.S. Nahar and

N. Morshed, 2014. Carbon dioxide emission from
brickfields around Bangladesh, Argil. Res. Innov.
Tech, 4(2): 70-75.
BBS (Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics), 2001.
Statistical Yearbook of Bangladesh. Bangladesh
Bureau of Statistics, Statistics Division, Ministry of
Planning, Govt. of Peoples Republic of Bangladesh,
Dhaka, Bangladesh.