Showing all results

Briefings
15 Sep 2016

Carbon leakage mythbuster: Finland (Suomi)

Executive Summary This policy brief interprets the findings of a new study by CE Delft that shows how energy-intensive companies in Finland have massively profited from their pollution to the count of €481 million because they are deemed to be at risk of “carbon leakage”. “Carbon leakage” refers to a hypothetical situation where companies transfer production…

Briefings
24 May 2016

The climate friendly transition of Europe’s energy intensive industries

The EU has a long-term climate objective of achieving economy-wide emission reductions of 80-95% by 2050 to avoid dangerous climate change. It is often argued that such deep emission reductions are technically impossible or that they would harm the economy and create unemployment.

In the spring of 2016, Carbon Market Watch therefore asked the Institute for European Studies to look at the feasibility of such emission cuts by 2050 in three of the most important manufacturing sectors in Europe: chemicals, steel and cement. The main findings of the report “The Final Frontier – Decarbonising Europe’s energy intensive industries” are summarised in this briefing.

Briefings
26 Apr 2016

Fossil fuel subsidies from Europe’s carbon market

Under the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) the power sector no longer receives allowances for free but is required to purchase them from auctioning. An exception is made through the so called Article 10c of the EU ETS Directive. This provision allows lower-income Member States from Central and Eastern Europe to give allowances for free to electricity installations under the condition that they invest at least the equivalent monetary value of the free allowances in the modernisation and diversification of their energy systems.

Briefings
14 Mar 2016

Carbon leakage mythbuster: Sweden

This policy brief interprets the findings of a new study by CE Delft that shows how energy-intensive companies in Sweden have massively profited from their pollution to the count of €700 million because they are deemed to be at risk of “carbon leakage”. “Carbon leakage” refers to a hypothetical situation where companies transfer production to countries with weaker climate policies in order to lower their costs. Under the current EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) rules, industrial companies that are believed to be at risk of “carbon leakage” are awarded free pollution permits.

Briefings
14 Mar 2016

Carbon leakage mythbuster: Netherlands

This policy brief interprets the findings of a new study by CE Delft that shows how energy-intensive companies in the Netherlands have massively profited from their pollution to the count of €1 billion because they are deemed to be at risk of “carbon leakage”. “Carbon leakage” refers to a hypothetical situation where companies transfer production to countries with weaker climate policies in order to lower their costs. Under the current EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) rules, industrial companies that are believed to be at risk of “carbon leakage” are awarded free pollution permits.

Briefings
14 Mar 2016

Carbon leakage mythbuster: Germany

This policy brief interprets the findings of a new study by CE Delft that shows how energy-intensive companies in Germany have massively profited from their pollution to the count of €4.5 billion because they are deemed to be at risk of “carbon leakage”. “Carbon leakage” refers to a hypothetical situation where companies transfer production to countries with weaker climate policies in order to lower their costs. Under the current EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) rules, industrial companies that are believed to be at risk of “carbon leakage” are awarded free pollution permits.

Briefings
14 Mar 2016

Carbon leakage mythbuster: France

This policy brief interprets the findings of a new study by CE Delft that shows how energy-intensive companies in France have massively profited from their pollution to the count of €2.7 billion because they are deemed to be at risk of “carbon leakage”. “Carbon leakage” refers to a hypothetical situation where companies transfer production to countries with weaker climate policies in order to lower their costs. Under the current EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) rules, industrial companies that are believed to be at risk of “carbon leakage” are awarded free pollution permits.

Briefings
14 Mar 2016

Carbon leakage mythbuster: United Kingdom

This policy brief interprets the findings of a new study by CE Delft that shows how energy-intensive companies in the UK have massively profited from their pollution to the count of €3.1 billion because they are deemed to be at risk of “carbon leakage”. “Carbon leakage” refers to a hypothetical situation where companies transfer production to countries with weaker climate policies in order to lower their costs. Under the current EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) rules, industrial companies that are believed to be at risk of “carbon leakage” are awarded free pollution permits.

Briefings
14 Mar 2016

Industry windfall profits from Europe’s carbon market

This policy brief interprets the findings of a new study by CE Delft that shows how energy-intensive companies in 19 European countries have massively profited from their pollution because they are deemed to be at risk of “carbon leakage”. “Carbon leakage” refers to a hypothetical situation where companies transfer production to countries with weaker climate policies in order to lower their costs. Under the current EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) rules, industrial companies that are believed to be at risk of “carbon leakage” are awarded free pollution permits.

Briefings
22 Dec 2015

Paris outcomes: Carbon Market Watch Analysis of COP 21

From 30 November to 12 December 2015, Parties to the UNFCCC met in Paris to negotiate a new global climate treaty.

The Paris Agreement was a remarkable outcome, especially after the failures of Copenhagen. Almost all involved, including Carbon Market Watch, seemed surprised at how positive the outcome was. However, expectations had been carefully managed in the preceding years, so that aspirations of environmentalists to have a treaty that reflected the scientific reality by dividing up the remaining global carbon budget, had been downplayed into unreality.