Inline Insights

Boom and Bust

The EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) has been up and down a rollercoaster over the last decade. Launched with considerable optimism in 2005 as one of the European Union’s prime policy instruments for tackling climate change by placing a price on greenhouse gas emissions, it has since gone through what can be most appropriately termed a “boom and bust” cycle.

At the end of Phase I in 2007, the price of an EUA effectively hit zero, as there was no provision to carry Phase I EUAs into the second phase.

2015 was a significant year for climate and energy policy and markets: from the momentous Paris agreement to Obama’s continuing push on the Clean Power Plan; from the new British Government’s fresh (and controversial) energy approach to, at last, some stability for the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS), which may have real implications for the longer-term.

Politicians have shown they are serious - to achieve a positive outcome, the negotiators need to do the same.

For those not acquainted with the international negotiations on climate change - perhaps even more so for those who have that first-hand experience - they are at best an irritant, at worst a pointless relevance. Since the UNFCCC^[1] process began in the early 1990s after the international community agreed that “dangerous” climate change should be addressed, negotiators have gathered year after year in different parts of the world to discuss how the international community can take action to mitigate the climate problem and how the most seriously affected regions (usually in poorer countries) can adapt to the changes brought about by the steady increase in atmospheric and sea temperatures.

The EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), the EU’s flagship climate policy instrument aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions at least economic cost and incentivising investment in the low-carbon economy, has been back in the news - for once in a positive sense.

In a speech at the European Parliament plenary debate on Monday 6^th July, First Vice-President of the European Commission, Frans Timmermans, said that the Commission “remains strongly committed” to present a circular economy package towards the end of this year.  The reasons are quite simple: Vice-President Katainen, Commissioner Vella, Commissioner Bienkowska, and others, essentially believe that the new circular economy package can bring:

The dominant media narrative on climate and energy policy under the Coalition Government had become something of a cliche. The Liberal Democrats were ‘the green heart’; the Tories were ‘arch-advocates of oil and gas’; the Lib Dems, led by Secretary of State Ed Davey, were the ‘champions of disruptive utilities companies’, taking on the power of the Big 6; and the Tories were ‘in the pockets of the big energy companies.’

Energy and environmental policies have been a regular talking-point during the period in office of this coalition government. Most of the public will have heard of David Cameron’s ambition that his should be the “greenest government ever”, while few speeches from Ed Miliband have grabbed the spotlight in the manner his “price freeze" party conference speech did in September 2013. Subjects which used to live in the world of policy and markets wonks - the link between wholesale and retail prices, the impact of energy efficiency measures, the cost of renewables, Russian gas pipelines, not to mention the controversies generated by fracking - have become almost mainstream topics.

If last autumn was the settling-in period, the New Year is the time for the new European Commission to get moving on its priorities. The European Parliament elected last May has now bedded in, the Committees have established a work programme, and the parliamentarians will be keen to start making an impact on policy-making and regulatory measures. The next few months are therefore likely to see a lot of activity. As energy policy - and its multiple linkages with the wider European economy - has already been highlighted by Juncker and his senior lieutenants as one of the most important issues on the agenda, Commission officials in DG Clima and DG Energy are going to be busy, as will the ENVI (Environment) and ITRE (Industry, Trade and Energy) Committees in the Parliament. This piece analyses the key themes and what may merge in terms of concrete policy or legislative proposals.

In Lima, at the beginning of this week, after two weeks of the usual tortuous negotiations, the 196 parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) emerged with the Lima Call for Climate Action. This sets out the main priority issues for the parties in relation to the landmark COP 21 in Paris in December 2015 - the deadline for an international agreement on climate change - and attaches a 39-page document (a “non-paper”) containing various options for different elements of  a draft negotiating text.

This note analyses Lima’s outcomes and the prospects for an international climate agreement in Paris 12 months away.

On 1 December representatives of the 196 parties (member countries) to the United Nations Framework on Climate Change (UNFCCC) will gather in Lima for the annual Conference of the Parties (COP) international meeting. The climate negotiations have in recent years - especially since the conspicuous failure of parties at Copenhagen in 2009 to agree an international treaty - tended to be regarded as a non-event, an interminable discussion from which nothing material ever emerges. Will Lima, COP 20, be any different?

This article follows up a recent piece I wrote on the importance of agreeing a 2030 climate and energy framework at last month’s European Council. Following that agreement in Brussels, this article analyses some of the interesting (and surprising) elements of the agreement, and looks ahead to how the agreement will be followed up over the next few months.

This Thursday and Friday, 23 and 24 October, at the European Council in Brussels, EU Heads of Government will take their most significant decision on climate change and energy policy for nearly six years, i.e. since the 2020 framework was passed into legislation. On the agenda this week is a prospective political agreement on the policy framework for climate and energy up to 2030, setting relevant targets to deliver that framework. Energy security is also on the agenda, with the Council reverting to its discussions in June on the European Commission report on how to reduce dependence on Russian gas.

The issue of deforestation and forest degradation, as explained in our previous analysis piece, has to be addressed urgently by donor and tropical forest countries alike. At present, these governments face the challenge of creating new regulatory frameworks to protect the world’s tropical forests. This, however, cannot be achieved without the collaboration of the private sector, a non-state actor which will play a key role in this process.

Deforestation, the “direct, human-induced conversion of forested land to non-forested land”, as defined by the UNFCCC, and forest degradation, are one of the greatest challenges of our time. As the Global Canopy Programme (GCP) reports, tropical forests cover approximately 7% of global land area and provide habitat for at least half of the world’s biodiversity. However, they are currently experiencing a net loss of 1.4 billion tonnes of carbon every year.

The temperatures are falling; the mornings and nights are getting a little darker; it feels like autumn is just around the corner - it’s back to school time! This particularly applies to the politicians and civil servants who ply their trade in Brussels on EU policies and regulation. The new European Parliament barely had time to convene before it departed for the summer break. At the European Commission, all eyes are on new President Jean-Claude Juncker as the horse-trading between him and member states for the top political jobs in Brussels, including Commissioner portfolios, reaches its climax over the next two weeks.