• Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Linkedin
Skip to content
Menu
REDD-Monitor
  • Start here
  • About REDD-Monitor
  • REDD: An introduction
  • Contact
REDD-Monitor

Carbon Trust warns of offset threats to carbon markets; Union of Concerned Scientists says REDD will undercut ETS by 33%

Posted on 28 November 200819 February 2013

Carbon Trust warns of offset threats to carbon markets; Union of Concerned Scientists says REDD will undercut ETS by 33%

On the eve of the Poznan UNFCCC Conference of Parties, even pro-market and cautious expert groups are starting to sound alarm bells about the possible impacts of cheap ‘offsets’ on existing carbon markets.

The widely respected and UK government-backed London-based Carbon Trust, which provides advice on carbon reductions to industry and governmental agencies, has warned that carbon offsets could swamp the European Emissions Trading Scheme, with “strong implications” for the price of carbon (see full article below).

Whilst the Carbon Trust’s concerns appear mostly to be related to cheap CDM credits, the problems that they highlight would be even worse with the introduction of REDD credits into the ETS. 

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) – also strongly pro-trading and a dominant organisation in the NGO Climate Action Network – will shortly publish a report showing that forest-based carbon credits could be sold for one-third less than current ETS credits. Contradictorily, the UCS simultaneously argues that this would not depress the price of carbon, though it fails to provide any convincing arguments as to why this would be so.

Meanwhile, in the real world, the price of ETS credits has again tumbled. Fears are already growing that, even without the depressive price impact of forest credits, this will lead to a “stunting” of funding for renewable energies and other clean technologies. 

Carbon offsets could swamp EU carbon price

Tue Nov 25, 2008 12:12pm EST

LONDON (Reuters) – A ballooning global supply of carbon offsets could flood the European Union’s emissions market and dent prices, according to a report to be published next month by Britain’s Carbon Trust.

EU member states, lawmakers and the EU executive Commission are in negotiations now to revamp the bloc’s emissions trading scheme (ETS) from 2013-2020, and face a mid-December deadline.

The EU ETS is the cornerstone of European climate policy. It distributes to industry a fixed quota of carbon emissions permits, which trade at a certain carbon price.

The scheme allows companies a cheap alternative way to meet their carbon caps, buying carbon offsets from developing countries, funding emissions cuts there instead.

A global offset glut may require tight import limits to maintain the edge of the EU scheme in driving domestic emissions curbs, the Carbon Trust’s Chief Economist, Michael Grubb, said on Tuesday.

“The implication is the only way you have a carbon market at all is to have a fortress Europe,” he said, speaking at a conference in London organized by The Institute of Economic Affairs and Marketforce. That assumed that the United States, Japan and Australia didn’t collectively introduce ambitious cap and trade schemes which mopped up some of the carbon offset supply.

Some EU member states have expressed concerned in the present talks that the EU ETS will impose crippling costs on business entering a recession. Increasing the flow of carbon offsets would cut those costs.

The Carbon Trust is a government-funded agency which advises business and policymakers on how to cut carbon emissions.

The report estimates that under current trends the total global supply of carbon offsets from 2013-2020 will exceed 10 billion tons of avoided carbon dioxide emissions — compared with a quota of EU carbon permits of 14.8 billion tons over the same period.

Such a volume poses a threat to EU carbon prices by potentially making it extremely cheap for industry to meet emissions targets, denting the impact of the scheme on driving low-carbon investments in Europe.

“It does have pretty strong implications for (EU carbon) price,” said Grubb, without commenting on the report’s price estimate.

(Reporting by Gerard Wynn, editing by Anthony Barker)

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

SUBSCRIBE!

Enter your email address to receive notification of new posts.

Recent themes
Natural Climate Solutions
WWF's conservation scandals
Aviation and offsetting
Conservation Watch

Recent Comments

  • shahid on James Moore sentenced to more than 11 years in prison for his role in the Bar Works scam
  • Kathleen McCroskey on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl
  • Delton Chen on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl
  • Kathleen McCroskey on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl
  • Chris Lang on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl

Recent Posts

  • Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl
  • Papua New Guinea Environmental Alliance letter to Pogio Ghate, Minister for Environment, Conservation and Climate Change
  • Ecomapuá Amazon REDD Project, Brazil: Pública investigation reveals Ecomapuá Conservação is selling “illegal” carbon offsets from land it does not own, without transferring the money to local communities
  • Response from Steve Zwick, Verra: “Verra will ask Kanaka Management Systems to cease and desist any actions that may mislead communities into thinking that Verra has not already rejected the project”
  • Response from Kanaka Management Services: “Please do not conduct legal trail or castigate REDD+ project developers on the website by writing text which shows the project developer in bad light”

Recent Comments

  • shahid on James Moore sentenced to more than 11 years in prison for his role in the Bar Works scam
  • Kathleen McCroskey on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl
  • Delton Chen on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl
  • Kathleen McCroskey on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl
  • Chris Lang on Offsetting is not an option if we are serious about addressing the climate crisis. My response to Hartmut Graßl

Issues and Organisations

30x30 AB 32 Andes Amazon Boiler rooms California Can REDD save ... ? Carbon accounting Carbon Credits Carbon Offsets CDM Conservation-Watch Conservation International COP21 Paris Deforestation FCPF FERN Financing REDD Forest definition Fossil fuels FPP Friends of the Earth FSC Green Climate Fund Greenpeace Guest post ICAO Illegal logging Indigenous Peoples Natural Climate Solutions NGO statements Plantations Poznan R-M interview REDD and rights REDD in the news Risk RSPO-Watch Safeguards Sengwer The Nature Conservancy UN-REDD UNFCCC World Bank WRM WWF

Countries

Australia Bolivia Brazil Cambodia Cameroon Canada China Colombia Congo Basin region Costa Rica DR Congo Ecuador El Salvador European Union France Germany Guatemala Guyana Honduras India Indonesia Kenya Laos Madagascar Malaysia Mexico Nicaragua Norway Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Republic of Congo Sierra Leone Sweden Tanzania Thailand Uganda UK Uncategorized United Arab Emirates USA Vietnam West Papua
©2022 REDD-Monitor | Powered by WordPress and Superb Themes!