VANCOUVER — Did you know there’s money to be made from global warming? Just ask Rev. Al Gore. It’s pretty much a given that most western governments have subscribed (some begrudgingly) to the Church of the Goracle.

Some have responded to the climate change challenge with Kyoto-like mandates; other jurisdictions, like our own B.C., have introduced carbon taxes. But it’s not surprising that, if forced down these green paths, market-based solutions still seem to provide the best options. Knowing that eventually they’ll be looked upon to atone for the West’s carbon sins, large industrial companies are starting to take preemptive action.

The Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX), launched in 2003, is the world’s first, and North America’s only active voluntary, legally binding trading system to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs). It works pretty much like any other stock market. But rather than oil futures or ­precious metals, members buy carbon credits through a cap and trade system.

About 400 companies belong to the CCX — mostly large corporations and municipal utilities. They make legally binding commitments to meet annual GHG emission-reduction targets. 

Those that reduce below the published targets have surplus allowances to sell or bank; those who emit over must purchase "exchange allowances and offsets" to compensate for their energy usage.

So, where can trucking companies fit in? Right now, there are few carriers in North America that have the scale to participate in the CCX. But as the market matures and more exchanges position themselves for carbon trading (the Montreal Exchange is working on it), smaller companies that can quantify their fuel and energy usage might one day be able to play the game, guesses Lynda Harvey, senior manager of NRCan’s FleetSmart Program.

First, though, she says governments must set cap and trade regulations and agree on a universal standard measuring system — perhaps one that goes beyond the CCX’s voluntary requirements.

Eventually, trucking companies, even owner
ops, could get in on some carbon trading action.

"Carriers can get involved … by realizing what their baseline is and being able to demonstrate the ability to show measurements and energy consumption improvements. Then, if the door opens for carbon trading, say, in 2010, you’ll have all the [data] on the books and have something to sell."

Sure, at first it’ll be harder for smaller companies to make it worth their while. But here’s where Harvey sees an opportunity for larger umbrella groups like the provincial trucking associations to get involved. She suggests that the Ontario Trucking Association (OTA), for example, becomes the go-to trading agency for its members. "Smaller companies could offer up their measured GHGs to, say the OTA, which collects all the carbon credits and trades them on the market on behalf of the industry."

Eventually, though, like any other successful industry, smaller private sector brokers will enter the market, and, who knows, even independent owner-operators might be able to get in on the action.

If all this sounds a little eccentric, well, it kind of is. But there’s no denying the exchange’s rapid growth (a record 100,496 Carbon Financial Instrument contracts traded in February) and the fact the general concept is garnering a lot of interest in legislative hallways. Word on the street is that, as you read this, a whole army of government lawyers and bureaucrats in Canadian Finance, Energy, and Transportation departments are on the case.

Besides, it’s not like these types of schemes are without precedent. In the ’80s, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency created a sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions trading program to combat acid rain. And "sulfur dioxide is trading at 400 to 500 bucks a ton," notes Harvey. "Is carbon going to go there 20 years from now? Who knows, but it could one day mean a lot of money."