Brussels, 25/01/2013 (Agence Europe) - There is no more time to waste. Immediate action must be taken if the carbon market is to be saved from collapse. It was because Commissioner for Climate Action Connie Hedegaard was convinced of this that she delivered a final wake-up call to the Parliament and to member states on Thursday 24 January - the day when the industry and energy committee of the Parliament rejected the proposal for short-term reform of the Emissions Trading System (ETS) with a temporary freeze on 900 surplus quotas (back-loading), which left members of the environment committee divided (see EUROPE 10771). As the price of carbon has dropped dramatically, she calls for swift approval of the proposal of the European Commission aimed at amending the ETS directive in order to prevent the European carbon market from sinking any further, and to prevent a European climate policy from being put away for ever.
“On a day when the carbon price at some point went below €3 it must be clear to all that when the Commission warned that the ETS price could drop dramatically it was not a false warning but a real possibility. This is not the time to put the Commission's back-loading proposal on the backburner. On the contrary, this should be the final wake-up call both to governments and to the European Parliament”, the commissioner stressed in a statement published late on Thursday afternoon.
Hedegaard pointed out that the ETS, “a market-based cap and trade system, is the most cost-efficient tool in EU climate politics”. She said: “If in doubt, look at all the big economies now following the EU example by establishing similar ETS systems: Australia, Korea, California, China, etc.”.
The commissioner also pointed out that the member states themselves have called on the Commission to present a proposal for immediately reforming the market and options for more structural measures over the longer term. “I can therefore only appeal to the governments and the European Parliament to act responsibly and support the back-loading. The alternative is a re-nationalisation of climate tools meaning a future patchwork of up to 27 different systems and taxes instead of one market creating a level playing field internally in Europe”, said Hedegaard, going on to conclude: “To those in industry who both say that they want a strong EU ETS while they at the same time lobby against the policy that can secure exactly that, I will say: it is time to think twice”. (AN/transl.jl)