The European Commission last week finalized a decision to reduce the amount of free pollution permits handed out to energy intensive industry for the period up to 2020. This decision comes at a time when the European Parliament and EU ministers are deliberating over how many pollution permits heavy industry should get for free after 2020.
According to a European Environment’s Agency (EEA) report published this week the oversupply of carbon permits in the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) remains ‘substantial’. At a time when lawmakers are discussing how to get Europe’s flagship climate policy back on track, this report comes as an urgent warning to those trying to save the EU’s failing carbon market.
Ahead of a committee vote at the European Parliament on the revision of the EU’s Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), four civil society networks and 22 organisations across Europe call on committee members to stop coal subsidies and take measures to ensure meaningful carbon price.
On September 17, Ngäbe people rejected an agreement between top representatives and the government, signed only a month before. In the meantime, the test filling of the reservoir resumed which has flooded affected communities. Carbon Market Watch along with 80 other local and international NGOs, have called on the Panamanian authorities to withdraw the Barro…
Earlier this month, the EU Court of Justice ruled against a case by eight Swedish heavy industry operators that were asking for more free pollution permits under the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) than they currently get. The EU ETS -meant to cut pollution- has so far provided industry a €24 billion pollution payout, a bill that taxpayers are picking up as governments forego scarce public money.
The first committee of the European Parliament to cast an opinion on the revision of the EU’s carbon market this week voted for more climate ambition and the establishment of an international climate action fund. A majority of members of the development committee supported an increase in the rate by which emissions are cut each…
During the Paris negotiations in December publication of Carbon Market Watch’s policy brief revealed that long-term success of Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions (NAMAs) depends on having clear guidelines on stakeholder consultations, oversight of sustainable development impacts and sector-specific environmental criteria. The strategic plan for the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and the NAMA Facility revision process are crucial opportunities to acknowledge these success factors.
Paris did not come up with a decision to mobilise trillions needed to put the world on a 1.5 C pathway. Developed countries will continue to take the lead in mobilizing climate finance. However, the financial provisions are weak, with most relevant points shoved into decisions.
Despite seemingly genuine fears amongst some negotiators that the role of carbon markets might not be mentioned in the final agreement, the Paris treaty created two different frameworks for market approaches that will be developed in detail over the next years.
The October talks in Bonn had a shaky start after the G77 opposed the Co-Chairs’ minimalist draft text. Other Parties expressed unhappiness at the lack of options and issues they saw as missing. Through Monday, Parties were allowed to bring in, with “surgical precision”, issues they felt essential to include. This process has bolstered Parties’ ownership of the text, but the talk is of coming up with ‘bridging proposals’ rather than reaching actual agreements on sections of the text.
Kaisa Amaral, Communications Director
Office: +32 2 335 36 64
Mobile: +32 485 07 6890
Carbon pricing 
International transport 
Climate governance 
Fair climate action