Emission Trading Scheme controversy in the European Commission

Publish date: March 18, 2011

The conference was introduced by Commissioner Connie Hedegaard and Director-General Jos Delebeke from DG Climate Action, and deputy state secretary Peter Olajos from Hungary. A panel with representatives from Business Europe, Climate Action Network, European Trade Union Confederation and the Centre for European Policy Studies commented on the Commission’s 2050 low-carbon roadmap which sets out a path for reducing domestic EU emissions by 80% between 1990 and 2050. The Commission presented its vision for green growth in a longer perspective, which was welcomed by all stakeholders, because it creates new jobs, as well as curbing emissions. Yet the measures to achieve it remain controversial.

Emissions trading

The Commission has proposed to set aside emission allowances in the ETS that would otherwise be auctioned. Delbeke explained that such a set-aside could be gradual and that it would not mean allowances would be cancelled. The purpose would be to push allowance prices upwards as well as creating greater predictability of prices. It represents a departure from the earlier belief of the Commission that only the cap on emission allowances should be set politically and that the market should be left to its own devices to set their price. A set aside would help incentivise investments in low emission technologies.

“It is necessary to introduce measures rather than targets. The use of energy efficiency must be speeded up and we need to optimise use of the ETS,” said Delbeke.

Global carbon trade

The use of carbon offsets to provide emission cuts by paying for emission reductions elsewhere in the world is controversial. Firstly, there is no agreement to multilaterally prolong the existing Kyoto mechanisms after 2012. Secondly, flaws in the CDM design have created perverse incentives that may actually increase emissions. Finally, Delbeke pointed out that the CDM may actually encourage industries to move production outside the EU, known as carbon leakage.

“Money may go to foreign competitors of European producers to pay them to do things that are normal in the EU but not in China,” Delbeke said. 

Representatives of industry also agreed that setting limits to offset credits was not a threat to the creation of a global carbon market. Such a market would best be created by linking domestic cap-and-trade schemes in all the major emitting countries.

The Roadmap for building a competitive low-carbon Europe by 2050 was launched earlier this month and suggests EU domestic emissions reduction (i.e. excluding emission credits from abroad) from 1990 levels of 25% by 2020, 40% by 2030, 60% by 2040 and 80% by 2050.

More News

All news

Open Letter: Urgent Call to Action – Ensure the Net Zero Industry Act CO2 Storage Injection Capacity Target protects EU industrial decarbonisation efforts and a Just Transition for All

Safeguarding the chapters on CCS in the NZIA are crucial, so says the 23 co-signatories to our letter sent to EU Member States and European Parliament. The NZIA is a golden opportunity to ensure appropriate development of much-needed CO2 storage capacity, enabling industrial decarbonisation and a Just Transition by the retention of important welfare-carrying jobs in the harder-to-abate sector, while at the same time ensuring the proportionate contribution of Oil and Gas companies.

Europe’s Hydrogen Journey: It’s Time to Move from Hype to Prudent Planning 

Overall, the target setting in the EU is an example that other regions of the world should follow in terms of creating demand for hydrogen in the right sectors, while backing it up with the renewable generation deployment to meet the demand from the electrolysers. However, the supportive landscape that could ensure targets are met is largely missing, leaving the EU strategy towards hydrogen use ambiguous and thus less effective. 

Subscribe to our newsletter

Get our latest news

Stay informed