by Graeme » Wed 25 Jun 2008, 03:16:19
Thanks for your comment. I'm not an expert on the European Emissions Trading Scheme but from what I have been able to discover so far is that you are partly
correct.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he New York Times reports today that after three years the much ballyhooed cap-and-trade system in Europe is not working and that instead of reducing greenhouse gases that carbon dioxide emissions are actually increasing.
Backers of these markets, which involve setting limits on greenhouse gases and then allowing companies to buy and sell emission permits, see the approach as one of the cheapest and most effective ways to control the gases in advanced economies. The presidential candidates Barack Obama and John McCain have both endorsed the idea.
Yet in Europe, which created the world’s largest greenhouse gas market three years ago, early evidence suggests the whole approach could fail. Carbon dioxide emissions are still rising in many industries, not falling.
However, this is perhaps because emissions trading has just begun for the first phase (2005 - 2007) where emissions increased
1.9%. There will be a phase 2 (2008 - 2012), and
phase 3 - allocations will be centralised by an EU authority during this period.
You are partly correct because this
MIT study suggests that the European system is "working well".
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')n a bid to control greenhouse gas emissions linked to climate change, the European Union has been operating the world's first system to limit and to trade carbon dioxide. Despite its hasty adoption and somewhat rocky beginning three years ago, the EU "cap-and-trade" system has operated well and has had little or no negative impact on the overall EU economy, according to an MIT analysis.
The MIT results provide both encouragement and guidance to policy makers working to design a carbon dioxide (CO2)-trading scheme for the United States and for the world.