Tag Archives: javascript
We’re Putting A Price On Carbon, But Is It Making A Difference?
More than 20% of global emissions are now either taxed or traded. But the question remains: will adding economic incentives to cleaner energy actually work? Putting a price on carbon emissions is seen as crucial to curbing climate change. And the good news is that much of the world is doing just that (though not the U.S.). A new report from the World Bank identifies 40 national, and 20 sub-national, mechanisms globally. The European Union, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand all now have emissions trading systems, or are implementing them. Other countries, like Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Japan, Norway, and South Africa have (or are implementing) carbon taxes. And then there are regional trading initiatives, such are those in California and Quebec. The fact that so many carbon pricing schemes have emerged shows a political will to mitigate greenhouse gases. Altogether, current schemes cover more than 20% of global emissions. And with China, Brazil and Chile all considering carbon trading, the prospect is for far more to be covered–perhaps up to 50%. “The fact that so many carbon pricing schemes have emerged shows a political will to mitigate greenhouse gases as countries increasingly use carbon pricing to deliver benefits both to our climate and to a sustainable economy,” says Joëlle Chassard, of the World Bank’s Carbon Finance Unit. “A transition towards a new generation of carbon markets is in the making.” What is more, the World Bank sees hopeful signs in links between schemes: for example, between E.U. and Australian systems, and California’s and Quebec’s. In time, such relationships could be a “step towards establishing a global carbon market,” it says. And, newer entrants are learning from earlier mistakes. The price of carbon in the EU’s system has collapsed several times, notably during the recession. So, the new schemes are putting in “price floors,” or stopping participants from hoarding allowances (a major problem in Europe). Still, the Bank isn’t exactly confident about averting dangerous global warming–which is the question that matters. “The international community has agreed to limit the increase in average global temperature to 2 degrees Celsius (°C) above pre-industrial levels,” it says. “The current level of action puts us on a pathway towards a 3.5–4°C warmer world by the end of this century.” And, the effectiveness of mechanisms like carbon trading remains in doubt. Emissions in Europe–our best test case–have fallen. But this was in a faltering economy, when businesses and individuals use less energy. A price in itself is meaningless; what matters is the number. So, it’s good news that more of the world is pricing carbon. But we should be wary about banking the outcome. http://www.fastcoexist.com/ Continue reading
Research And Markets: Carbon Capture And Storage May Be Key To Meeting Global Emissions Targets
DUBLIN — Research and Markets ( http://www.researcha…/carbon_capture ) has announced the addition of the “Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) for Coal-Fired Plants – Opportunity Assessment and Key Country Analysis to 2025” report to their offering. Although currently negligible in prominence, Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) could be the technology that makes the world’s carbon emission reduction targets achievable, say energy experts The authors, in their latest report. As the report* explains, carbon storage techniques, such as enhanced oil recovery, have been used in the energy sector for decades, but only recently has the concept of long term carbon storage been viewed as a viable means of reducing the amount of carbon released into the atmosphere from power plants. Correspondingly, a modest 238 megawatts (MW) of CCS capacity was installed globally at the end of 2011, but according to current government plans and other initiatives, a far more substantial 10 gigawatts (GW) is expected to come online by the end of the decade. CCS refers to the technology of capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) before or after the combustion of fossil fuels (gas or coal), transporting it and pumping it into underground geological formations. This process prevents large quantities of CO2 from being released into the atmosphere by securely storing it between impermeable rock or similar material. China, the US, Australia, Japan, Norway, the Netherlands and the UK have invested heavily in CCS Research and Development (R&D) activities and are the global leaders in the industry; however, there are currently no large-scale CCS demonstration projects active for coal-fired plants. Governments around the world are showing a lack of commitment in significantly reducing fossil fuel consumption, and so CCS could prove the most realistic answer to one of the greatest predicaments of our time. However, The authors’s report states that this technology must be employed much more widely in order for CCS to make the level of impact its potential suggests. This report provides the retrofit potential and new market potential for the global CCS market in terms of revenues and capacity. It also discusses the key drivers and restraints impacting the market. Companies Mentioned Alstom Chevron ConocoPhilipps E.ON Vattenfall Statoil ENEL Siemens RWE Japan CCS Company The Co-operative Research Centre for Greenhouse Technologies For more information visit http://www.researcha…/carbon_capture About Research and Markets Research and Markets is the world’s leading source for international market research reports and market data. We provide you with the latest data on international and regional markets, key industries, the top companies, new products and the latest trends. Read more here: http://www.heraldonl…l#storylink=cpy Continue reading
Parliament Committee Votes To Prop Up EU’s Ailing Carbon Market
Published 20 June 2013 The European Parliament’s Environment Committee has given its support to a compromise plan to boost the price of allowances on the EU’s carbon market. To become law, the proposal to temporarily remove some of the glut of permits that has weighed on prices still needs to win backing from a plenary session of the parliament next month in Strasbourg, and from EU member states. Traders said the market had already priced in a positive vote and allowances on the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) fell by 3.6% to €4.53 a tonne short after the vote on Wednesday (19 June). After a defeat of the proposal in a full session of the European Parliament in April, the carbon price fell to a record low of less than €3 a tonne. British MEP Chris Davies, spokesman for the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe on the committee, indicated that the deal was far from perfect. In a statement after the vote, he said the plan “amounts to little more than a modest regulatory adjustment. It will maintain the operation of carbon trading but it will not provide a driving force to promote long-term low-carbon investments.” “We still need to agree on clear targets for Europe’s CO 2 reductions by 2030 to give investors greater certainty”, Davies said, “and we urgently need to secure a global agreement on measures to tackle climate change.” Green groups welcome deal Campaigners welcomed the yes vote, although environmentalists say the proposal is very weak and will have a limited impact on prices. But they hope it will be a stepping stone towards deeper structural measures, such as the permanent withdrawal of some carbon permits. “With this vote the Environment Committee has sent an important political signal: there is still commitment to the EU’s flagship climate policy,” said Rob Elsworth of the campaign group Sandbag. The carbon market plan was meant to be a quick fix for a market that has hit a series of record lows far below levels of €40 to €50 needed to drive a shift to lower carbon energy. The proposal has met fierce resistance from heavy industry, which complains about anything that drives up the cost of energy in difficult economic times, and from Poland, whose economy depends on coal. Germany has failed to take a stand ahead of elections in September. Carbon prices have reacted to the twists and turns of the debate, which has dragged on for years. Price swings, often in excess of 10%, have been exaggerated by the weakness of the market. POSITIONS: Eurofer , the European steel industry association, voiced scepticism about the vote, saying backloading was an “unnecessary intervention” in the EU carbon market and that greater attention should be paid to industrial competitiveness instead. “The EU emissions trading scheme is working as it should and Europe is well on track to meet its 2020 reduction targets,” says Gordon Moffat , director-general of the European Steel Association. “Instead of artificially raising carbon costs the Commission must address the competitive disadvantages for industry resulting from European climate and energy policies.” There were some modifications brought by the Parliament’s vote which Eurofer welcomed as satisfactory, however. These include provisions to reintroduce carbon allowances that have been withheld from one year to the next and a new financing mechanism to reserve 600 million allowances for the development of innovative low-carbon technologies. “Of course these modifications might be regarded as improvements compared to the original version. It seems that there is less risk now of emissions allowances being removed from the market permanently,” Moffat said. “Still, the proposal represents market interference as well as additional, artificial increases in energy prices. It would have been more helpful if all the political energy that went into meddling with the ETS would have been invested in policies that strengthen the competitiveness of European industry.” Oxfam , the global anti-poverty group, said the Parliament committee vote had “sent a signal to markets that EU climate policy is here to stay”. However, it criticised the compromise deal for weakening the European Commission’s original proposal “substantially”. Lies Craeynest , Oxfam’s EU climate change expert, said: “The upcoming structural reform of the ETS will need to be much more ambitious to help stave off dangerous climate change which threatens the food security of millions around the world. “The proposal for a new fund makes lots of sense but it should be aimed at funding real climate solutions at home and meeting the EU’s promises to help poor countries deal with climate change abroad, rather than propping up energy-intensive industries.” NEXT STEPS: 1-4 July : European Parliament to vote on proposal at a plenary session in Strasbourg. Continue reading
