“Carbon Monitoring for Action (CARMA) is a massive database containing information on the carbon emissions of over 50,000 power plants and 4,000 power companies worldwide. Power generation accounts for 40% of all carbon emissions in the United States and about one-quarter of global emissions. CARMA is the first global inventory of a major, emissions-producing sector of the economy.” At least that is according to CARMA an initiative of the Center for Global Development, a Washington-based think tank.
But according to environmental consultant Shakeb Afsah, of Performeks, the overall data and the analytical architecture of CARMA are flawed. Afsah’s findings are detailed in a new report ‘Carbon Monitoring for Action (CARMA): Climate Activism Built on Specious Data’ at a new website, www.climatedataduediligence.org.
Afsah says he arrived at this conclusion by checking the following: 1) the precision of CARMA’s ranking, (2) the extent of the numerical differences between CARMA’s and USEPA’s annual CO2 estimates, (3) the lack of correlation between CARMA’s and USEPA’s carbon intensity values, (4) the predictable pattern of error in CARMA’s annual CO2 estimates, and (5) the logical and quantitative inconsistencies in CARMA’s next decade predictions of CO2 emissions. This report concludes that CARMA’s statistical methodology for estimating CO2 emissions of power plants is incompatible with the protocols for CO2 monitoring and verification recommended by the US Government, IPCC and the European Commission. Because climate management requires considerable coordination across countries, CARMA’s conflicting methodology, data and results can upset the fledgling progress towards international consensus.
According to the CARMA website they are very proud of the data they provide to users, but are also keen for feedback.
But according to Afsah, he first informed CARMA’s about data quality issues on December 4, 2007, and after five months there has been no serious response or suggested disclaimer on the CARMA website.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
“This due diligence report shows that the popular climate management initiative Carbon Monitoring for Action (CARMA) run by a prominent Washington DC based think tank, the Center for Global Development (CGD,) utilizes erroneous and questionable CO2 emissions data to rank power plants and motivate public activism.”
CARMA’s purpose is to motivate public activism. But their emissions calculations and thus their rankings are significantly at variance with the USEPA. To reconcile these differences, CARMA has some explaining to do.
The trouble with good auditors is that they are a picky bunch. I know, as I the keep the financial records for several non-profits. If it is not explained and recorded, then for audit purposes, it didn’t happen.
The longer CARMA delay explanations, the more they look like the type of activist group that goes for policy based evidence, rather than evidence based policy.
For people with only one idea they sure spend a lot of time saying it.
CARMA equals myopia.