Carbon removals and emissions reductions are not synonyms. So why are they treated as such? When the EU fails to separate removals from reductions in its climate targets, we veer off course to stop climate change. All-encompassing net targets stall real progress. Our new guide explains why separate targets matter and how they should be …
Read more “Beyond Net: A guide on separate permanent removal targets in the EU”
Everybody loves a good design. As the EU prepares national targets for 2040, we will see whether they are designed for real-world climate impact – or just for a clean look hiding messy emissions. In our fresh-off-the-press position paper, Carbon Market Watch sets out what the European Commission needs to keep in mind when designing …
Read more “Position paper: removals in the EU’s post-2030 climate architecture”
Apparently, EU lawmakers are exploring four potential loopholes to weaken the target under the guise of “greater flexibility”. Under consideration are suggestions that include postponing climate action until the latter half of the 2030’s, allowing for more flexibility between EU sectors, or relying on international offsets and additional carbon removals to somehow fill the gap caused by EU inaction.
With the growing momentum for the adoption of a global carbon levy on international shipping this year, the European Union’s proposal must go stronger on justice and equity.
Not only does the Climate Law not mention the different roles of biogenic sequestration by natural sinks and permanent removals, but it also fails to determine how much or which type of removals should be used to reach the net-zero target by 2050, or how much residual emissions will be allowed at that point.
The EU needs a clear and comprehensive strategy that is mindful of the risks, challenges and opportunities of supporting the development and scale-up of a sufficient supply of permanent removals.
This week, the rapporteur of the European Parliament’s Environment committee (Ian Duncan) published his draft report on the EU’s carbon market reform, kicking off the legislative debate. Disappointingly, the proposal fails to address the most pressing issues that need fixing in order to make the EU ETS fit-for-purpose and in line with the Paris climate agreement.
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.
Paris, 12 December 2015 – Today, at the UN climate talks in Paris a global deal where all countries have agreed to take action on climate change was adopted. Carbon Market Watch comments on the long-term goal, the ambition ratcheting mechanism, provisions for the use of markets, the establishment of a new mechanism, human rights provisions, bunker emissions, pre-2020 action and the impact of the Paris treaty on EU’s climate policies.
Stay in touch and receive our monthly newsletter, campaign updates, event invites and more.
