As the EU and Switzerland are about to conclude the technical negotiations to link the EU and Swiss carbon markets in the coming months, a new policy brief and report by Carbon Market Watch show that the EU must increase its climate target to avoid diluting domestic emission reduction obligations with foreign allowances from the Swiss carbon market.
6 May 2015, Brussels. European policymakers provisionally agreed to start implementing the reform of the EU’s Emissions Trading System on 1 January 2019 and put the pollution permits that were due to come back to the market by 2020 directly into the new Market Stability Reserve. Carbon Market Watch welcomes this first step to fix the EU’s carbon market but cautions that the upcoming revision of the EU ETS will need to permanently tackle the glut of pollution permits.
5 May 2015, Brussels. As the EU and Switzerland are about to conclude negotiations to link the EU and the Swiss carbon markets, a new report shows that benefits of linking carbon markets may be outweighed by the risks, such as reduced overall emissions abatement, lower domestic investments and co-benefits as well as a loss of public funds. The report also finds concerns about public participation and transparency provisions and provides recommendations for the EU ETS revision.
The number of regions and countries that are putting a price on carbon pollution is vastly increasing. Nearly 40 countries already price carbon or plan to do so, including China that will roll out a national carbon market from 2016 onwards. Linking these different carbon markets is being envisaged by several European policymakers.
Jurisdictions with carbon markets currently account for about 40% of global economic activity (GDP)[1]. Linking these different carbon markets with the ultimate goal of establishing a global carbon market is seen as an integral part of the future climate regime, since it can increase the pool of mitigation options available, thereby reducing costs and allowing countries to increase their climate ambition. These benefits however only materialize if the linked carbon markets have a similar level of ambition and a similar design of a number of key features, such as price controls, quantitative and qualitative restrictions on carbon offsets, and the type of allocation method used. Paradoxically, while lower abatement costs are an important economic motive for linking two emission trading systems, they can also constitute a significant political barrier, since citizens of the higher cost system might be reluctant to pay for emission reductions in the other jurisdiction.
The inclusion of international flights into the EU’s carbon market was one factor that created momentum for a global, rather than regional, measure to address aviation emissions. Recognizing Europe’s potential importance in the ongoing negotiations towards a global market based measure, open letters from fifteen NGOs across Europe were sent to EU’s transport and environment/climate ministers, calling on them to step up in promoting emissions reductions from aviation – a fast-growing and polluting sector.
Sharing experiences with existing climate mitigation mechanisms, such as the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and highlighting the severe impacts on basic human rights these UN mechanisms can have, activists from Africa, Asia and Central America met with financial institutions and policy makers involved in financing these projects. The accountability of climate finance was thereby discussed from a European perspective.
The number of regions and countries that are putting a price on carbon pollution is vastly increasing. China, for example, announced that it will roll-out a national carbon market from 2016 onwards, South-Korea’s national cap-and-trade system started early 2015 and South Africa will implement a carbon tax from 2016.
The role carbon markets will play in a future climate treaty to be adopted by the end of this year is still unclear. Yet, several countries and regions, such as Japan and the European Union (EU), see an important role for international carbon markets.
Norway was the third country after Switzerland and the EU to officially submit its climate contribution towards the Paris climate agreement. Like the EU, Norway announced an at least 40% emission reduction target by 2030, which it intends to fulfil jointly with the EU by joining the EU’s 2030 climate framework. While Norway has made it clear that land sector accounting shall not affect its ambition level, the EU has left doors open for forestry accounting tricks. If the EU want to jointly fulfil its 2030 climate target with Norway, the EU must also exclude the option of planting trees to offset emissions.
Stay in touch and receive our monthly newsletter, campaign updates, event invites and more.
