Carbon Market Watch

🧟 Halloween is all about scary hidden surprises and that's what you might get if you order something from low-cost Chinese web platforms Shein or Temu. A cross-border investigation by European consumer watchdogs found nearly 70% of toys, jewellery and USB chargers they tested on the two shopping sites were too toxic or unsafe to meet EU safety regulations (https://lnkd.in/e54quky8) 🎃 But it doesn't stop there. Our and NewClimate Institute's Corporate Climate Responsibility Monitor found that Shein's climate performance is more trick than treat. The fast fashion portal was the worst performer among all the fashion companies evaluated. Find out more in the CCRM fashion deep dive: https://lnkd.in/dRuHvws2 Testachats / Testaankoop

WATCH NOW🎬 Maasai interview: experiences with carbon market projects Current regulations to protect local communities in carbon markets present clear gaps and are not sufficient. Three Maasai representatives shared with Carbon Market Watch first-hand testimonies about the harmful impact of the rapid expansion of the soil carbon business in Northern Tanzania. They called out the hypocrisy of the offsetting logic: "Why would I need to change the way I make my animals graze and the way my community has been doing things for you to continue emitting and creating this problem?"

By proposing to dilute the Emissions Trading System for road transport and buildings (ETS2) with more emission allowances, the Commission risks undermining it as an effective climate tool and shifting the EU further away from its climate goals.  Instead of increasing the supply of ETS2 emission allowances to contain the carbon price, EU policymakers must push for stronger complementary policies and national governments must make socially targeted climate investments. It is only by addressing the demand for emission allowances under ETS2, that the carbon price can be contained without jeopardising the EU reaching its climate targets. The LIFE Effect consortium counts on the European Parliament and the Council to uphold their climate responsibilities and ensure an environmentally effective and socially fair ETS2, which has never been more at risk. Read more here: https://lnkd.in/eNGp4ecD

EU leaders have finally given their conditional support to the EU climate target for 2040. Yesterday, the European Council kicked off the process to amend the EU Climate Law. This move can be interpreted as qualified support for the net 90% emissions reduction target by 2040, while endorsing a troubling amount of loopholes. These risk undermining the EU’s ability to achieve climate neutrality. EU policymakers must now ensure that the 2040 climate target is fit for purpose and does not lead to the weakening of EU climate policy and legislation. Setting an adequate domestic climate target for 2040, as mandated by the European Climate Law, is essential, and its adoption must not be accompanied by loopholes and deregulation elsewhere. Particularly worrying are the plans to rely on international carbon credits, which would lead to more EU emissions than would otherwise be the case. This is in breach of the EU’s historical and ongoing responsibility to tackle climate change, and scientific advice to deliver domestic emission reductions first. The intention to integrate carbon removals in the ETS risks deterring necessary mitigation efforts by large polluting industries. Finally, the EU cannot afford to downgrade national targets in the land use, agriculture, transport, small industry and waste management sectors. Diluting the Emissions Trading System for road transport and buildings (ETS2) with more emissions allowances is also unwise and shortsighted. The EU institutions must not allow this. Ensuring this is not just a cosmetic target is now critical. We urgently need a loophole-free 2040 target.

Kurt Vandenberghe,  the director general of the European Commission’s Climate Action DG, has spoken in favour of continuing to issue free pollution permits to heavy industry under the EU Emissions Trading System and delaying the zero point of the EU ETS emissions cap beyond 2039. This kind of capitulation to industry demands is unwarranted, risky and unfair. It is high time for the EU to end this gravy train which is costing the taxpayer and the climate dearly. Despite receiving hundreds of billions of euros in EU ETS freebies over the years, much of which was converted into windfall profits, the decarbonisation of European heavy industry has stalled. And despite pledges to wind down these freebies, heavy industry in the EU continues to receive enough free allowances to cover most of its pollution, which costs the EU some €40 billion, according to a joint study with WWF we released earlier this year. Moreover, our model forecasts that, across all sectors, over 2.5 billion free allowances will go to heavy industry between 2025 and 2030. That’s over €200 billion at a price of €80. We and others in civil society call on the EU to stop subsidising industrial conglomerates that are not committing to and are not delivering decarbonisation. We simply can’t afford to keep pumping CO2 into the atmosphere while hoping the problem will magically solve itself: big polluters must pay for their pollution. The revenue this raises can then be invested into energy efficiency, clean energy infrastructure, scalable emission reduction technologies, clean mobility, adaptation, green lead markets, international climate finance. Don’t cripple the ETS - let it work for a sustainable Europe. Read our joint report, 'A clean industrial revolution in Europe': https://lnkd.in/dndHStjT Read our joint letter, 'ETS revenues for the people and the climate': https://lnkd.in/d892xeBu Check out our EU ETS revenue simulator: https://lnkd.in/eeUePH7y

Tell your local climate denier or climate ‘realist’ - strong climate action isn’t just an ecologic and moral imperative, but it’s an *economic necessity*. And if they don’t (somehow?) care about the former, chances are they have, ironically, been abusing the ‘competitiveness’ or ‘economic’ argument to water down climate action. The 2040 target should be at least net 90%, without any dodgy international credits, for the EU to “remain competitive and technologically advanced”. And this isn’t just us at CMW saying this, but more than 2000 scientists across Europe have united their voices to push policymakers. “Ambitious climate targets are therefore the foundation of Europe’s competitiveness. “ they say, we couldn’t agree more. The facts they list are simple, and the implications obvious. A good target can: ● save over €850 billion in fossil fuel imports between 2025 and 2040, ● increase competitiveness and create more than 2 million new jobs in clean industries, ● cut household energy bills by up to two-thirds and ● reduce Europe’s dependency on autocratic and unreliable petrostates, strengthening independence and resilience. Furthermore, more than 130 companies and investors across Europe - from SME’s to multinational behemoths - have also spoken out in favour of at least a net 90% target by 2040. Well done to scientists and business leaders for speaking out. Policy makers, how about you listen to these voices instead of the corporate and political so-called leaders that continue to stick their heads in the sand and lobby against climate action? Today is the day to show real leadership, and live up to this crucial moment to (a) minimise the costs of inaction, and (b) maximise the current and future benefits of taking climate change as seriously as it should be. As my colleague Fabiola De Simone puts it: “EU leaders, what are you waiting for?” Ursula von der Leyen Wopke Hoekstra Bart De Wever Micheál Martin European Commission Pedro Sánchez Kyriakos Mitsotakis Luc Frieden Andrej Plenkovic Manfred Weber Council of the European Union Emmanuel Macron Friedrich Merz Minister-president Dick Schoof

The EU’s flagship Emissions Trading System should put pressure on polluters, not subsidise them. A leaked draft of the EU ETS state guidelines for the 2026-2030 broadens the list of sectors that are eligible to receive compensation for the carbon price attached to their electricity use (known as indirect cost compensation) by almost double. The leak, which appeared in the Brussels media, added heavily polluting sectors, such as the manufacturing of organic chemicals, fertilisers, nitrogen, ceramic tiles, as well as the mining of iron and metal ores. We believe such a move would be a misguided proposal that will further slow the already glacial pace of industrial decarbonisation in Europe, hurting European heavy industry’s climate performance and long-term competitiveness. We urge the European Commission to reduce or eliminate rather than expand indirect cost compensation, as the so-called carbon leakage risks facing European industry are more than adequately addressed by the forthcoming Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism. How long can we keep subsidinging fossilised business as usual in this way? Total indirect cost compensation disbursed in 2023 by the 15 member states who enforce this scheme amounted to €3.9 billion, with €1.6 billion being paid by Germany alone. Many national governments spend between 20 and 30% of their ETS revenue  on indirect cost compensation, with Austria reaching almost 50%, and Luxemburg, an outlier, spending 517% of its revenues on its compensation scheme. This is unsustainable and diverts urgently needed financial resources away from decarbonisation and the fair and effective transition to a sustainable economy. We need decarbonisation, not indirect cost compensation. Read our report 'A clean industrial revolution in Europe': https://lnkd.in/dndHStjT Read our joint letter 'ETS revenues for the people and the climate': https://lnkd.in/d892xeBu

As EU leaders gather today and tomorrow to discuss the fate of the bloc’s 2040 climate target, Carbon Market Watch demands that they must listen to their scientists, civil society and businesses and agree on an ambitious 2040 climate target. The EU Summit comes amid promises by Commission President von der Leyen to offer countries even more concessions on future climate policy and legislation than those already included in the Commission’s proposal, while the European Parliament and EU Council sit on their hands rather than hold leadership to account. While the key decision makers swither and slither over trading off real climate action as a bargaining chip in return for political favours, scientists, civil society, and businesses have been crystal clear: decisive climate action is not only an ecological and moral imperative, but also an economic necessity. This week, a group of more than 2,000 scientists across the continent urged EU leaders to support at least a 90-95% net domestic emissions reduction target by 2040, without reliance on international credits. 👉 Their key conclusions? Ambitious climate targets are the foundation of EU competitiveness. Such a target would: 💶 Save over €850 billion in fossil fuel imports between 2025 and 2040 💼 Increase competitiveness and create more than 2 million new jobs in clean industries ✂️ Cut household energy bills by up to two-thirds 🛡️Reduce the EU’s dependency on autocratic countries, strengthening the bloc’s independence and resilience Over 130 corporate leaders have endorsed the economic value of a strong climate target, considering decarbonisation and competitiveness as mutually reinforcing, while a ‘higher ambition’ alliance of European businesses, major city networks, regional governments, and civil society organisations have also recently called for a net domestic emissions reduction target of at least 90% by 2040. Closing the circle, CAN Europe, representing 200 environmental organisations active in 40 European countries, exhorted EU climate leaders to announce an ambitious domestic climate target and fully implement, and ideally overachieve, the goals of the European Green Deal. 📢 Carbon Market Watch urges EU leaders to: 🎯 Set an overall climate target for 2040 of at least 90% net reductions. 🚫 Exclude any potential reliance on international credits to achieve it, but use climate finance on top to make EU climate action more ambitious. 📝 Clarify the different contributions of land-based sequestration and permanent removals towards the target. EU leaders and key policymakers, what are you waiting for? Ursula von der Leyen Wopke Hoekstra European Commission Bart De Wever Andrej Plenkovic Nikos Christodoulides Petteri Orpo Emmanuel Macron Friedrich Merz Kyriakos Mitsotakis Micheál Martin Evika Silina Gitanas Nausėda Luc Frieden Minister-president Dick Schoof Robert Fico Manfred Weber

Last night, the European Commission responded to EU member state concerns over the high potential price of the Emissions Trading System for buildings and road transport (ETS2). We welcome that the Commission is exploring allowing member states to access ETS2 auctioning revenues in advance as this will enable early investments into urgently needed social and environmental policies which will help lower the ETS2 price. However, the Commission’s proposal to respond to fears over high price forecasts by amending  the Market Stability Reserve (MSR) decision will lead to an increased amount of emissions in the ETS2 sector, shifting the EU further away from its essential climate goals.    Rather than increasing the number of pollution allowances in the ETS2, to prevent steep price increases the EU must address the demand for emission allowances, by introducing and upholding complementary climate policies – such as CO2 standards for cars and vans and fossil fuel boiler phase-outs. National governments must ensure that all ETS2 revenues support vulnerable households and deliver climate action, including strong and inclusive Social Climate Plans. These policies will lower demand for emission allowances and thereby decrease the ETS2 carbon price. National governments have it in their power to make ETS2 socially fair and environmentally effective, without jeopardising its climate integrity. 

A coalition of oil-producing states is exploiting the negotiations over the International Maritime Organisation's Net-Zero Framework to torpedo climate ambition in the shipping sector by demanding the scrapping of regional measures, such as the EU's Emissions Trading System. We join T&E in opposing these piracy tactics and call on IMO member states not to buckle to these unreasonable demands. Our forthcoming study, out in November, will show through concrete data that the NZF doesn’t lead to enough emission reductions, does not price enough emissions, does not price those high enough, and does not generate enough revenue. That is why we need regional measures like the EU ETS. Read the full T&E statement: https://lnkd.in/ev4n8Xm3 Read our latest article on the Net-Zero Framework: https://lnkd.in/eDmDaYv4