KYOTO SINKS EUROPE
Financial Post, 9 January 2007
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=03445f57-0777-4554-ac7c-ec63cb073223
Kyoto sinks Europe: Billions in costs make it more and more unlikely
that the EU can continue to go it alone slashing carbon emissions
By Benny Peiser
A political drama is unfolding in Europe over
the future of its Kyoto
strategy. Its outcome will shape the future of climate policy and international
negotiations for years to come.
At the heart of the escalating confrontation
lies Europe's Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS)
and mounting concerns about its prospective failure. The crisis centres on a
fundamental conflict between economic realism and environmental idealism,
between national interest and green ideology. It has exposed the increasing
tension between Europe's green enthusiasm and
the realization that its unilateral framework comes at a hefty cost that is
beginning to erode the economic stability of a waning continent.
Carbon trading is the EU's
principal strategy for meeting its Kyoto
target of reducing CO2 emissions by 8% by 2012. The scheme was launched two
years ago in the hope that it would achieve what more than 10 years of
political commandeering had failed: significant reductions in CO2 emissions.
Instead, year after year, most EU countries continue to increase their
greenhouse-gas emissions. Rather than proving its effectiveness, the trading
system has pushed electricity prices even higher while energy-intensive
companies are forced to close down, cut jobs, or pass on the costs to
consumers.
As the reality of economic pain is felt all
over Europe, deep cracks in its green
foundations are beginning to become apparent. Guenter
Verheugen, the EU's
industry commissioner, has warned that by "going it alone" Europe is
burdening its industries and consumers with soaring costs that are undermining Europe's international competitiveness. Instead of
improving environmental conditions, Europe's
policy threatens to redirect energy-intensive production to parts of the world
that reject mandatory carbon cuts.
Verheugen's warning reaffirms what U.S.
administrations have been saying for many years. It is aimed at the rapidly
evolving challenges posed by Asian competitors such as China and India
that are set to overtake Europe's sluggish
economy within the next couple of decades. Indeed, Europe's
imprudent unilateralism is not only constraining its trade and industry; worse
still, it has led to a significant slowdown in European R&D budgets, a
sliding trend that is hampering the development of low-carbon technologies.
The ETS's
malfunctioning is partly due to an inherent flaw that allowed member states to
allocate more emission permits than European industrial plants actually needed.
Although Europe's energy utilities receive
carbon permits free of charge, they have passed on the market price to industry
and private consumers. In consequence, Germany's energy costs rose by
almost €6-billion
($9.2-billion) in 2005, a price tag that is expected to double in the next
couple of years. The cunning strategy ensured that power companies reaped
billions in windfall profits. And yet without the massive sweetener, Brussels could not have
gained the support of industry for this risky scheme.
The dodgy bargain ended in political fiasco:
Last year, the trading scheme nearly collapsed as carbon prices crashed. In a
desperate attempt to salvage an increasingly volatile system, Brussels has now slashed 7% from the National
Allocation Plans recently submitted by EU member states from the second phase
(2008-12).
The decision has been greeted with irritation
and sheer anger in many European capitals as the damaging consequences become
apparent. Germany's Economy
Minister has called the cuts "totally unacceptable" and Berlin is threatening to
challenge the decision in court.
As far as the imminent future is concerned, one
thing is patently clear: After years of inflated promises that the Kyoto process would not
upset their economy, European governments are beginning to realize that the era
of cost-free climate hype is coming to an end. In its place, concern is growing
that key industries and entire countries will pay a devastating price for
Europe's reckless Kyoto
craze.
The stakes are particularly high for Germany.
Despite its customary role as environmental cheerleader, it has been hit
hardest. Brussels
bureaucrats have slashed more than 30 million tonnes from its annual carbon
permit. It faces up to €3.5-billion
in fines if it cannot bring down emissions by 2008.
Germany is extremely vulnerable to imposed energy caps.
It is strongly opposed to plans for replacing its coal-fired power plants with
gas-fired facilities, as such a move would only
increase its already precarious dependency on Russian gas imports. Furthermore,
successive governments have agreed to shut down all nuclear power plants, which
account for a third of Germany's
electricity generation. The Greens' anti-nuclear achievement has thus turned
ideological triumph into an energy nightmare.
To make matters worse, Germany's
industry bosses have warned that they will not proceed
with billions in intended energy investments should the government lose the
bitter dispute with the European Commission over slashed emission credits. The
EU has made clear that it will not yield to German demands, as this would destabilize
its fragile trading scheme. However, should German companies be forced to buy
carbon credits at higher prices, it will simply remove funds and economic
incentives that the government had hoped would be invested in alternative
technologies.
As the price for electricity, goods and
services continue to rise and Asian competitors catch up with Europe's
lethargic economy, the public is beginning to question Brussel's
unilateral climate policy. According to a recent EU poll, more than 60% of
Europeans are unwilling to sacrifice their standard of living in the name of
green causes. As long as advocates of Kyoto
got away with claims that their policies would not inflict any significant
costs, many people were tempted to believe in improbable promises. Now that the
true cost of Kyoto
is starting to hurt European pockets, the erstwhile green consensus is
unravelling.
Oblivious to its deepening isolation, Europe is
trying frantically to salvage the political capital it has invested in the Kyoto process. China and India have consistently ruled out
participating in a global emissions trading scheme. It is unlikely that their
booming economies and growing consumer demands would cope with energy
restrictions on their development. Just the thought of allocating carbon
credits for up to two billion potential middle-class consumers makes the mind
boggle.
In recent weeks, even U.S. Democrats have
cautiously started to lower expectations. They now concede that even under a
Democratic administration, the United States
is unlikely to join any international climate regime that would exclude Asia's looming superpowers and burden its economy with
unilateral obligations.
Political realists have absorbed these sobering
developments. There are signs that they are preparing the public for the EU's ultimate exit from Kyoto-type treaties. Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, Chancellor Angela Merkel's climate advisor
during Germany's EU and G8 presidencies, has suggested that G8 countries as
well as China and India should adopt their own, national climate goals and
policies, a loose road map that could replace the fading Kyoto treaty after it
runs out in 2012.
What then are the chances that Europe's flagging climate policy will survive? The
prospects are rather bleak. It remains unclear, however, whether the disarray
over Kyoto and
its rickety emissions-trading scheme will discourage others from getting their
own fingers burnt.
Benny Peiser is a researcher at Liverpool John
Moores University
in the U.K.
and is the editor of CCNet.
Copyright 2007, National Post