130 likes | 275 Views
Next Steps Post-Kyoto: U.S. Options The EU Experience Sustainable Energy Institute Washington D.C, March 30, 2005. Robert Donkers, Environment Counselor at the Delegation of the European Commission to the US. European Framework: European Climate Change Programme (ECCP).
E N D
Next Steps Post-Kyoto: U.S. OptionsThe EU ExperienceSustainable Energy InstituteWashington D.C, March 30, 2005 Robert Donkers, Environment Counselor at the Delegation of the European Commission to the US
European Framework:European Climate Change Programme (ECCP) • Involves key stakeholders • Objective: Cost effective ways to meet EU -8% Kyoto objective • Total reduction potential of 578 - 696 Mt CO2eq./year = twice Kyoto ‘-8%’ identified (including strong support for emissions trading) • EU measures for 276 -316 Mt CO2eq./year currently “in implementation”… but need for monitoring of effectiveness and review
EU emissions trading scheme 1 (EU ETS) • New market based instrument: CO2 emissions covered by allowances • First “trial period” 2005 – 2007, limited to CO2 emissions from large, energy intensive users (12,000 installations) • Each Member States allocated allowances to companies – Commission to approve each NAP • Companies can trade surplus allowances or buy extra allowances on the market • Companies may use credits from GHG emission reduction projects (CDM and JI) undertaken in developing and developed countries • Sanctions for non-respect (€40 per tonne) Market price for CO2 – companies decide on the most cost-effective emission reduction strategies
EU emissions trading scheme 2 (EU ETS) Experience to date: • January 2005: 2.5 m tonnes CO2 traded at average Euro 6-7 • February 2005: 4 m tonnes CO2 traded at average Euro 7 • March 2005: still running, but on Tuesday March 22 alone 2 m tonnes CO2 traded at Euro 16.45 !!! Careful Conclusion: ‘Appetite’ is increasing and the market is becoming of age
What else is needed to implement EU climate change policy? • Extend emissions trading to other installations and GHG gases • Bring in transport (in particular aviation) • Investment in R&D and new technologies • Changes in behaviour (energy saving etc) • Urgent & significant increase of renewable energy
POST 2012 March 2005 Communication of the European Commission • Depending on the risks we are willing to accept, global emissions will have to peak between 2015 and 2025 • (Re) engage our partners: build a broad coalition among developed and developing countries • EU leadership • Advantages of participation • Disadvantages of non-participation • Build on Kyoto framework • Is there a one size fits all? A mix of mitigation and adaptation policies A mix of targets, timetables, technologies, and policies “Action on climate change post-2102”(http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/climat/future_action.htm)
POST 2012 European Council, March 22-23, 2005: • Explore possibilities for a Post-2012 arrangement in UN context with widest possible cooperation by all countries on the basis of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities • Develop medium and long term EU strategy consistent with 20 C objective above pre-industrial levels as the maximum “safe” level to stabilize GHG concentrations • Global reductions required with 15-30% reduction by 2020 for developed countries and further reductions beyond 2020 (60-80% by 2050) compared to 1990 levels
Member State’s aspirations for future emission reductions in the EU • Netherlands : - 30% by 2020 • Germany : - 40% by 2020 • Sweden: - 60% by 2050 • UK: - 60% by 2050 • France: - 75% by 2050
U.S. Options: Climate change has major economic and political impacts • New technology and innovation (energy, transport): jobs • Agriculture (crop yields, increased water stress, extreme weather events) • Marine ecosystems and fisheries • Public health • Foreign and security policy and development • Immigration • Land use and infrastructure • Economic losses (destruction of property, insurance etc)
U.S. Options for measures No EU believe in technology fix • US Administration refuses to tackle the problem NOW, despite Swiss Re, Arctic Council and other reports • Elements of US-EU co-operation: • R & D • Earth Observation • International Partnership for a Hydrogen Economy • Very important activities at State level • Short term US measures needed: no regret policy + energy security + use of existing technologies • Energy efficiency • Energy conservation • Renewables incl. wind power (EU +Dutch Embassy cases)
KEY EU MESSAGES FOR OUR PARTNERS • Developing countries have the right to develop, but in order to stabilize GHG concentration ALL countries have to take action towards sustainable emission paths • Developed countries are responsible for the vast majority of historical emissions and therefore have to drastically CUT their emissions