The EU’s and ICAO’s diverging ambitions to reduce aviation’s climate impacts
CMW commissioned environmental consultants Ricardo to produce this study comparing the functioning of the EU ETS and CORSIA, and their respective climate ambitions.
Delegated Act on permanent emission storage through carbon capture and usage (CCU)
In response to a European Commission consultation, CMW outlined its view on the role of permanent carbon capture and utilisation in the EU’s Emissions Trading System.
BAH, HUMBUG! END €TS FREEBIES. Make Polluters Pay for a Fair and Clean Transformation
BAH, HUMBUG! END €TS FREEBIES. MAKE POLLUTERS PAY FOR A FAIR AND CLEAN TRANSFORMATION
Triple shock: Draft report would keep Europe’s carbon market in dysfunctional state
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.
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.
Carbon leakage myth buster
The concept of “carbon leakage” is a major area of discussion in the legislative proposal to revise the EU’s Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) for the post-2020 period. The Commission’s proposal continues the trend of awarding free allowances, effectively representing a financial subsidy of €160 billion, to heavy emitters without providing evidence for the need of such beneficial treatment. A new Carbon Market Watch policy brief “Carbon leakage myth buster” shows how certain manufacturing companies have profited from selling the free EU ETS allowances they were given and recommends how to avoid such windfall profits in the future.
New Polish government stands defiant on coal and climate progress
After the victory for Poland’s Law and Justice Party in the country’s recent elections, the position the country takes on the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) is likely to be one of even more defiant opposition. However, the EU ETS generates significant financial revenues for Poland. The billions of euros that the country is set to receive from the EU ETS can help the transition to a just climate friendly society in Poland, whose unprofitable coal mining sector represents an increasing burden on its finances.
More energy-intensive industries will pollute for free after 2015
The European Commission has unveiled a list of 175 industries that will receive protection from the costs of climate change policies (“carbon leakage”) up to 2019. Surprisingly more financial support will be handed over to energy-intensive firms, despite there being no evidence for the occurrence of carbon leakage so far. Carbon Market Watch calls upon the European Parliament and Member States to reject the new list. Energy-intensive industries should not be allowed to pollute for free and therefore other measures to address carbon leakage should be developed for the post-2020 period.
EU ETS regulators fail to disclose carbon offset purchasing data
Today, the European Commission released data on the number of international offsets used in 2013 by companies in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS). Unlike previous years, the European Commission only released aggregate information which means it is no longer possible to check the origin of the 133 million offsets that entered the EU ETS in 2013. Carbon Market Watch, Sandbag Climate Campaign and the Climate Market & Investment Association (CMIA) strongly condemn this lack in transparency as it significantly reduces civil society’s ability to scrutinize the carbon offset projects that were used.
