IFC IS PART OF CARBON CREDIT SCAM

The International Finance Corporation is a member of the World Bank Group.
Their vision is that people should have the opportunity to escape poverty and improve their lives. IFC is now the fastest growing component of the World Bank Group.


IFC allegedly provides investments and advisory services to build the private sector in developing countries. What they do is make money, lots of money, while redistributing our wealth and the money of less supportive nations to Third World Countries.The issue I have is that much of their money goes to some not so poor countries like Communist China and quasi-Communist Russia. Both rich in economies that do not trickle down to the majority of their population, because of the totalitarian regime that controls both countries.

The IFC does this through their investment branch. A company or entrepreneur seeking to establish a new venture or expand an existing enterprise can approach IFC directly by submitting an investment proposal.

After this initial contact and a preliminary review, IFC may proceed by requesting a detailed feasibility study or business plan to determine whether or not to appraise the project.

IFC's project/investment cycle illustrates the stages a business idea goes through as it becomes an IFC-financed project.

Although IFC is primarily a financier of private sector projects, it may provide finance for a company with some government ownership, provided there is private sector participation and the venture is run on a commercial basis. For example:For the World Bank after approving a loan for Shell’s contractors in Nigeria, the IFC immediately moved to the next critical piece of funding for the poor. In mid-June, the Board approved a $1.75 million loan for a 4-star hotel in Port Harcourt because “these companies will continue to demand clean reasonably priced hotel rooms.”source: — Stephen Kretzmann


Although IFC does not accept government guarantees for its financing, its work often requires close cooperation with government agencies in developing countries. Sounds like bureaucratic double talk to me. Either they deal with the private sector or they don't!

But today,their big investment venture is in the new Carbon Credits market. A scheme that has spawned the Global Warming sector that will make huge sums of money for these supposed philanthropists.


The Carbon Finance Unit serves as IFC's in-house resource for all carbon finance-related issues, providing services directly to buyers and sellers. The Unit leads in the development of new products, and serves as an advisor on a variety of products and services to support private sector participation in the evolving carbon market.

IFC is well-positioned to assist project sponsors with participation in the rapidly growing market for 'carbon credits'. Through the Carbon Finance Program, IFC contributes to the development of an important new market for environmental services.

The Carbon Finance Unit brings IFC's extensive experience in project finance to manage long term and credit risks in emerging markets. Carbon Finance products and services include:

Finance Products and Services
Carbon Delivery Guarantee
Monetization of future cashflows from sales of carbon credits
Debt and equity for carbon rich products and businesses
Work with Financial Intermediaries and municipalities to help aggregate carbon credits from their various investment operations

CERs and ERUs (carbon credits) are greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions that are created when a project reduces or avoids the emissions of GHGs, such as carbon dioxide or methane, relative to what would have been emitted under a 'business as usual' scenario. For example, a new wind power plant that displaces existing or expected coal-fired power generation would create a significant amount of credits, as would a project at a landfill that captures and utilizes some or all of the methane that previously escaped into the air. In contrast, a wind power project that offsets hydropower would not generate credits as the baseline itself has no GHG emissions.

The USA is the largest CONTRIBUTOR TO THE IMF BY CONTRIBUTING 24% OF THE IMF ANNUAL BUDGET. Russia contributes 3%, and Great Britain 5%.

The United States had to borrow 47% of the money borrowed from international markets to prop-up our dollar in 2007. Yet we are still contributing more than 450% more money to the IFM than Great Britain, and 800% more than Russia, the European producer of a majority of the fuels used.

IFM is viewed as a philantrophic organisation, but since 1956 when it was formed, it has been a profit making machine.Their 2007 annual report showed an operating income of 2.6 billion dollar profit! This is an operating return on net worth of 21.7% for 2007.source: annual report of IFM
Communist China received 1.5 billion dollars in aid from the IFM in 2007, and even more disturbing is the investment of 2.4 billion dollars in Russia! Russia is a powerhouse economic giant in Europe because they have oil! Why give them monetary assistance?

Even the IFC’s own economists believe the IFC suffers from an “approvals culture, which provides a disincentive for rigorous analysis [that] still persists today.” This “approvals culture” is fueled by the fact that investment officers’ job performance is assessed on the amount of money they can move out the door, not on the success of projects or the social, environmental or development impacts of the projects.


World Bank watchers have their own take on the IFM monetary projects. "The IFC is using tax payer’s money to create corporate welfare for a huge multi–national," says Lori Pottinger, director of the Africa program at International Rivers, an environmental organization in Berkeley, California. And this won’t be the first time. According to Friends of the Earth, an environmental watchdog agency, AES stands to gain a billion dollars in financing from the IFC for the company’s power projects around the world.


IFC investment officers continue to develop projects like luxury resort hotels and shopping malls, which may generate modest foreign exchange and create employment but few other benefits, especially when the investors and occupants are foreigners.
The bottom line is we should stop supporting this World organization. Better to spend the money on the the poor in our own country!