A new report reveals that cookstove carbon projects eligible for the Korean Emissions Trading System are at risk of issuing 18 times more credits than they should, echoing past EU carbon market mistakes
CMW commissioned environmental consultants Ricardo to produce this study comparing the functioning of the EU ETS and CORSIA, and their respective climate ambitions.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.